Re: SRA Win32 sync() code

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> One reason I like the idea of adopting a sync-when-you-write policy is
>> that it eliminates the need for anything as messy as that.

> Yes, but can we do it without causing a performance degredation, and I
> would hate to change something to make things easier on Win32 while
> penalizing all platforms.

Having to keep a list of modified files in shared memory isn't a penalty?

Seriously though, if we can move the bulk of the writing work into
background processes then I don't believe that there will be any
significant penalty for regular backends.  And I believe that it would
be a huge advantage from a correctness point of view if we could stop
depending on sync().  The fact that Windows hasn't got sync() is merely
another reason we should stop using it.

            regards, tom lane