Re: Determine optimal fdatasync/fsync, O_SYNC/O_DSYNC options
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Determine optimal fdatasync/fsync, O_SYNC/O_DSYNC options |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200409131415.59936.josh@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Determine optimal fdatasync/fsync, O_SYNC/O_DSYNC options (Gaetano Mendola <mendola@bigfoot.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Gaetano, > Now that the argument is already open, why postgres choose > on linux fdatasync? I'm understanding from other posts that > on this platform open_sync is better than fdatasync. Not necessarily. For example, here's my test results, on Linux 2.6.7, writing to a ReiserFS mount on a Software RAID 1 slave of 2 IDE disks, on an Athalon 1600mhz single-processor machine. I ran the loop 10,000 times instead of 1000 because tests with 1,000 varied too much. Simple write timing: write 0.088701 Compare fsync times on write() and non-write() descriptor: (If the times are similar, fsync() can sync data written on a different descriptor.) write, fsync, close 3.593958 write, close, fsync 3.556978 Compare one o_sync write to two: one 16k o_sync write 42.951595 two 8k o_sync writes 11.251389 Compare file sync methods with one 8k write: (o_dsync unavailable) open o_sync, write 6.807060 write, fdatasync 7.207879 write, fsync, 7.209087 Compare file sync methods with 2 8k writes: (o_dsync unavailable) open o_sync, write 13.120305 write, fdatasync 7.583871 write, fsync, 7.801748 -- --Josh Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: