Re: initdb and fsync

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Noah Misch
Тема Re: initdb and fsync
Дата
Msg-id 20120205011849.GC24073@tornado.leadboat.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: initdb and fsync  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Ответы Re: initdb and fsync  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Re: initdb and fsync  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 03:41:27PM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 13:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Yeah.  Personally I would be sad if initdb got noticeably slower, and
> > I've never seen or heard of a failure that this would fix.
> 
> I worked up a patch, and it looks like it does about 6 file fsync's and
> a 7th for the PGDATA directory. That degrades the time from about 1.1s
> to 1.4s on my workstation.

> So, is it worth it? Should we make it an option that can be specified?

If we add fsync calls to the initdb process, they should cover the entire data
directory tree.  This patch syncs files that initdb.c writes, but we ought to
also sync files that bootstrap-mode backends had written.  An optimization
like the pg_flush_data() call in copy_file() may reduce the speed penalty.

initdb should do these syncs by default and offer an option to disable them.


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Patch: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Review of: explain / allow collecting row counts without timing info