Horton

Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ?

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Paul Guo <guopa@vmware.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Michael Brown <michael.brown@discourse.org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-09-30T06:56:03Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 05:08:24PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> If we want this it should be an option, because it flushes out data
> other than the pgdata dir, and it doesn't report errors on old
> kernels.

Oh, OK, thanks.  That's the part about 5.8.  The only option
controlling if sync is used now in those binaries is --no-sync.
Should we use a different design for the option rather than a 
--syncfs?  Something like --sync={on,off,syncfs,fsync} could be a
possibility, for example.
--
Michael

Commits

  1. Adjust documentation for syncfs().

  2. Improve the naming in wal_sync_method code.

  3. Allow using syncfs() in frontend utilities.

  4. Add support for syncfs() in frontend support functions.

  5. Make enum for sync methods available to frontend code.

  6. Move PG_TEMP_FILE* macros to file_utils.h.

  7. Change client-side fsync_fname() to report errors fatally