Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes

Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 02:07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> [ win32.h says ]
>> #define fsync(fd) _commit(fd)

>> What this means is that switching to a simple preference order
>> "fdatasync, then fsync" will result in choosing fsync on Windows (since
>> it hasn't got fdatasync), meaning _commit, meaning Windows users see
>> a behavioral change after all.

> _commit() != fsync()

Um, the macro quoted above makes them the same, no?  One of us
is confused.

			regards, tom lane