Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>, ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2005-06-23T04:00:19Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
[ on the other point... ] Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net> writes: > But is it really a problem? I somewhere got the impression that some > drives, on power failure, will be able to keep going for long enough to > write out the cache and park the heads anyway. If so, the drive is still > guaranteeing the write. If the drives worked that way, we'd not be seeing any problem, but we do see problems. Without having a whole lot of data to back it up, I would think that keeping the platter spinning is no problem (sheer rotational inertia) but seeking to a lot of new tracks to write randomly-positioned dirty sectors would require significant energy that just ain't there once the power drops. I seem to recall reading that the seek actuators eat the largest share of power in a running drive... regards, tom lane