Re: Simplifying wal_sync_method
От | Thomas F. O'Connell |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Simplifying wal_sync_method |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4F32BAB2-B119-4493-A051-DB3946C8B3B9@sitening.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Simplifying wal_sync_method (Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
UFS was the filesystem on the Solaris 9 box. -- Thomas F. O'Connell Co-Founder, Information Architect Sitening, LLC Strategic Open Source: Open Your i™ http://www.sitening.com/ 110 30th Avenue North, Suite 6 Nashville, TN 37203-6320 615-469-5150 615-469-5151 (fax) On Aug 11, 2005, at 4:18 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 02:11:48AM -0500, Thomas F. O'Connell wrote: > >> I was recently witness to a benchmark of 7.4.5 on Solaris 9 wherein >> it was apparently demonstrated that fsync was the fastest option >> among the 7.4.x wal_sync_method options. >> >> If there's a way to make this information more useful by providing >> more data, please let me know, and I'll see what I can do. >> > > What would be really interesting to me to know is what Sun did > between 8 and 9 to make that so. We don't use Solaris for databases > any more, but fsync was a lot slower than whatever we ended up using > on 8. I wouldn't be surprised if they'd wired fsync directly to > something else; but I can hardly believe it'd be faster than any > other option. (Mind, we were using Veritas filesyste with this, as > well, which was at least half the headache.) > > A
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: