Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> writes:
> On 11/30/10 7:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> writes:
>>> Apparently, testing for O_DIRECT at compile time isn't adequate. Ideas?
>>
>> We should wait for the outcome of the discussion about whether to change
>> the default wal_sync_method before worrying about this.
> Are we considering backporting that change?
> If so, this would be another argument in favor of changing the default.
Well, no, actually it's the same (only) argument. We'd never consider
back-patching such a change if our hand weren't being forced by kernel
changes :-(
As things stand, though, I think the only thing that's really open for
discussion is how wide to make the scope of the default-change: should
we just do it across the board, or try to limit it to some subset of the
platforms where open_datasync is currently the default. And that's a
decision that ought to be informed by some performance testing.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
