On Friday 05 November 2010 22:53:37 Greg Smith wrote: > > If open_dsync is so bad for performance on Linux, maybe it's bad > > everywhere? Should we be rethinking the default preference order? > > > > > > And I've seen the expected sync write performance gain over fdatasync on > a system with a battery-backed cache running VxFS on Linux, because > working open_[d]sync means O_DIRECT writes bypassing the OS cache, and > therefore reducing cache pollution from WAL writes. Which looks like a setup where you definitely need to know what you do. I.e. don't need support from wal_sync_method by default being open_fdatasync...
Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
