Re: [HACKERS] Re: Faster CREATE DATABASE by delaying fsync (was 8.4.1 ubuntu karmic slow createdb)
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>, Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, Michael Clemmons <glassresistor@gmail.com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndquadrant.com>, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
Date: 2010-02-08T01:31:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers, pgsql-performance
Attachments
- faster_createdb_v3.patch (text/x-patch) patch v3
On Sunday 07 February 2010 19:27:02 Andres Freund wrote: > On Sunday 07 February 2010 19:23:10 Robert Haas wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > >> This is turning into yet another one of those situations where > > >> something simple and useful is being killed by trying to generalize > > >> it way more than it needs to be, given its current goals and its lack > > >> of external interfaces. There's no catversion bump or API breakage > > >> to hinder future refactoring if this isn't optimally designed > > >> internally from day one. > > > > > > I agree that it's too late in the cycle for any major redesign of the > > > patch. But is it too much to ask to use a less confusing name for the > > > function? > > > > +1. Let's just rename the thing, add some comments, and call it good. > > Will post a updated patch in the next hours unless somebody beats me too > it. Here we go. I left the name at my suggestion pg_fsync_prepare instead of Tom's prepare_for_fsync because it seemed more consistend with the naming in the rest of the file. Obviously feel free to adjust. I personally think the fsync on the directory should be added to the stable branches - other opinions? If wanted I can prepare patches for that. Andres