Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Sync vs. fsync during checkpoint

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Kevin Brown
Тема Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Sync vs. fsync during checkpoint
Дата
Msg-id 20040207123350.GH2608@filer
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Sync vs. fsync during checkpoint  (Kevin Brown <kevin@sysexperts.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> But that someplace else
> could easily be a process forked by the backend in question whose sole
> purpose is to go through the list of files generated by its parent backend
> and fsync() them.  The backend can then go about its business and upon
> receipt of the SIGCHLD notify anyone that needs to be notified that the
> fsync()s have completed.

Duh, what am I thinking?  Of course, the right answer is to have the
child notify anyone that needs notification that fsync()s are done.  No
need for involvement of the parent (i.e., the backend in question)
unless the architecture of PG requires it somehow.



-- 
Kevin Brown                          kevin@sysexperts.com


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Make failed in HEAD with make -j
Следующее
От: "Merlin Moncure"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Sync vs. fsync during checkpoint