Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2001-03-15T20:20:09Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> Based on the tests we did last week, it seems clear than on many
> platforms it's a win to sync the WAL log by writing it with open()
> option O_SYNC (or O_DSYNC where available) rather than issuing explicit
> fsync() (resp. fdatasync()) calls.  In theory fsync ought to be faster,
> but it seems that too many kernels have inefficient implementations of
> fsync.

Can someone explain why configure/platform-specific flags are allowed to
be added at this stage in the release, but my pgmonitor patch was
rejected?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026