Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.30.0103151910390.826-100000@peter.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane writes: > I think we need to make both O_SYNC and fsync() choices available in > 7.1. Two important questions need to be settled: > > 1. Is a compile-time flag (in config.h.in) good enough, or do we need > to make it configurable via a GUC variable? (A variable would have to > be postmaster-start-time changeable only, so you'd still need a > postmaster restart to change it.) As a general rule, if something can be a run time option, as opposed to a compile time option, then it should be. At the very least you keep the installation simple and allow for easier experimenting. > There's also the lesser question of what to call the config symbol > or variable. I suggest "wal_use_fsync" as a GUC variable, assuming the default would be off. Otherwise "wal_use_open_sync". (Use a general-to-specific naming scheme to allow for easier grouping. Having defaults be "off" consistently is more intuitive.) -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://yi.org/peter-e/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: