Re: checkpointer continuous flushing

>>> (3) posix_fadvise on Linux is a bad idea... the good news is that it
>>>     is not needed there:-) How good or bad an idea it is on other system
>>>     is an open question...
>>
>> I don't know what is the best way to verify that, if some body else has
>> access to such a m/c, please help to get that verified.
>
> Why wouldn't we just leave it out then? Putting it in when the one 
> platform we've tried it on shows a regression makes no sense.  We 
> shouldn't include it and then remove it if someone can prove it's bad; 
> we should only include it in the first place if we have good benchmarks 
> showing that it is good.
>
> Does anyone have a big Windows box they can try this on?

Just a box with a disk would be enough, it does not need to be big!

As I wrote before, FreeBSD would be a good candidate because the 
posix_fadvise seems much more reasonable than on Linux, and should be 
profitable, so it would be a pity to remove it.

-- 
Fabien.