Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It may have been much earler in the debate, but has anyone checked to see
> what the maximum possible gains might be - or is it self-evident to people
> who know the code?
fsync off provides an upper bound to the speed achievable from being
smarter about when to fsync... I doubt that fsync-once-per-checkpoint
would be much different.
regards, tom lane
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performa... Nathan Myers
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performa... Philip Warner
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performa... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performa... Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performa... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performa... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performa... Tom Lane
- RE: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performa... Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performa... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performance improveme... Philip Warner
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performance impro... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performance ... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performance improveme... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] CommitDelay performance improvement Philip Warner
