Re: Load distributed checkpoint

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <jim@nasby.net> writes:
> > I believe there's something similar for OS X as well. The question is:
> > would it be better to do that, or to just delay calling fsync until the
> > OS has had a chance to write things out.
> 
> A delay is not going to help unless you can suppress additional writes
> to the file, which I don't think you can unless there's very little
> going on in the database --- dirty buffers have to get written to make
> room for other pages, checkpoint in progress or no.

I am afraid a delay between write and fsync is the only portable option
we have right now --- there is hope that since the check point write, we
will not have a huge number of dirty buffers at the start of the
checkpoint that need to be written out.

--  Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +