On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 3:22 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 12:35 AM, Mithun Cy <mithun.cy@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>> * Instead of creating our own buffering system via buffer_file_write()
>> and buffer_file_flush(), why not just use the facilities provided by
>> the operating system? fopen() et. al. provide buffering, and we have
>> AllocateFile() to provide a FILE *; it's just like
>> OpenTransientFile(), which you are using, but you'll get the buffering
>> stuff for free. Maybe there's some reason why this won't work out
>> nicely, but off-hand it seems like it might. It looks like you are
>> already using AllocateFile() to read the dump, so using it to write
>> the dump as well seems like it would be logical.
>>
>
> One thing that is worth considering is AllocateFile is recommended to
> be used for short operations. Refer text atop AllocateFile(). If the
> number of blocks to be dumped is large, then the file can remain open
> for the significant period of time.
-- Agree. I think I need suggestion on this we will hold on to 1 fd,
but I am not sure what amount of time file being opened qualify as a
case against using AllocateFile().
--
Thanks and Regards
Mithun C Y
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com