On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 01:35, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Yes; it's supposed to, and that logic works fine on some other platforms.
No, the logic was broken to begin with. Linux technically supported O_DSYNC all along. PostgreSQL used fdatasync as the default. Now, because Linux added proper O_SYNC support, PostgreSQL suddenly prefers O_DSYNC over fdatasync? > Until you've > quantified which of the cases do that--which is required for reliable > operation of PostgreSQL--and which don't, you don't have any data that can > be used to draw a conclusion from. If some setups are faster because they > write less reliably, that doesn't automatically make them the better choice. I don't see your point. If fdatasync worked on Linux, AS THE DEFAULT, all the time until recently, then how does it all of a sudden need proof NOW? If anything, the new open_datasync should be scrutinized because it WASN'T the default before and it hasn't gotten as much testing on Linux. Regards, Marti -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
