Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1?
От | Marti Raudsepp |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTinZ6Vw58v9_7tSPox-f1nmCyV1K4XOxuaJiDkgo@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for
9.1?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 01:35, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Yes; it's supposed to, and that logic works fine on some other platforms. No, the logic was broken to begin with. Linux technically supported O_DSYNC all along. PostgreSQL used fdatasync as the default. Now, because Linux added proper O_SYNC support, PostgreSQL suddenly prefers O_DSYNC over fdatasync? > Until you've > quantified which of the cases do that--which is required for reliable > operation of PostgreSQL--and which don't, you don't have any data that can > be used to draw a conclusion from. If some setups are faster because they > write less reliably, that doesn't automatically make them the better choice. I don't see your point. If fdatasync worked on Linux, AS THE DEFAULT, all the time until recently, then how does it all of a sudden need proof NOW? If anything, the new open_datasync should be scrutinized because it WASN'T the default before and it hasn't gotten as much testing on Linux. Regards, Marti
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: