Re: fallocate / posix_fallocate for new WAL file creation (etc...)

On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 02:13 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Even in that case, if a user can easily know which platform posix_fallocate
> should be used in, we can commit the patch with the configurable GUC
> parameter.

I disagree here. We're not talking about a huge win; this speedup may
not even be detectable on a running system.

I think Robert summarized the reason for the patch best: "I mean, if
posix_fallocate() is faster, then it's just faster, right?". But if we
need a new GUC, and DBAs now have one more thing they need to test about
their platform, then that argument goes out the window.

Regards,Jeff Davis