Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux)
От | Craig Ringer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMsr+YG6Eo=z7EXK=V+5-iimyWOAixOpd39dOxmzw6am=Rh66Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux) (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 30 April 2018 at 09:09, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Considering the variety in interpretation and liberties taken, I > wonder if fsync() is underspecified and someone should file an issue > over at http://www.opengroup.org/austin/ about that. All it's going to achieve is adding an "is implementation-defined" caveat, but that's at least a bit of a heads-up. I filed patches for Linux man-pages ages ago. I'll update them and post to LKML; apparently bugzilla has a lot of spam and many people ignore notifications, so they might just bitrot forever otherwise. Meanwhile, do we know if, on Linux 4.13+, if we get a buffered write error due to dirty writeback before we close() a file we don't fsync(), we'll get the error on close()? -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: