Re: What happened to open_sync_without_odirect?
| От | Josh Berkus |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: What happened to open_sync_without_odirect? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4D33511B.6020607@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: What happened to open_sync_without_odirect? (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: What happened to open_sync_without_odirect?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/15/11 4:30 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Last I remember, we were going to add this as an option. But I don't
>> see a patch in the queue. Am I missing it? Was I supposed to write it?
>
> I don't know, but let me add that I am confused how this would look to
> users. In many cases, kernels don't even support O_DIRECT, so what
> would we do to specify this? What about just auto-disabling O_DIRECT if
> the filesystem does not support it; maybe issue a log message about it.
Yes, you *are* confused. The problem isn't auto-disabling, we already
do that. The problem is *auto-enabling*; ages ago we made the
assumption that if o_sync was supported, so was o_direct. We've now
found out that's not true on all platforms.
Also, test results show that even when supported, o_direct isn't
necessarily a win. Hence, the additional fsync_method options.
-- -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: