[HACKERS] Re: AW: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
Okay ... we can fall back to O_FSYNC if we don't see either of the others. No problem. Any other weird cases out there? I think Andreas might've muttered something about AIX but I'm not sure now. You can safely use O_DSYNC on AIX, the only special on AIX is, that it does not make a speed difference to O_SYNC. This is imho because the jfs only needs one sync write to the jfs journal for meta info in eighter case (so that nobody misunderstands: both perform excellent). Hmm. Does everyone run jfs on AIX, or are there other file systems available? The same issue should be raised for Linux (at least): have we tried test cases with both journaling and non-journaling file systems? Perhaps the flag choice would be markedly different for the different options? - Thomas ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] Re: AW: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
My UnixWare box runs Veritas' VXFS, and has Online-Data Manager installed. Documentation is available at http://www.lerctr.org:457/ There are MULTIPLE sync modes, and there are also hints an app can give to the FS. More info is available if you want. LER -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler/ Phone: +1 972 414 9812 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749 US Original Message On 3/16/01, 9:11:51 AM, Thomas Lockhart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding [HACKERS] Re: AW: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC: Okay ... we can fall back to O_FSYNC if we don't see either of the others. No problem. Any other weird cases out there? I think Andreas might've muttered something about AIX but I'm not sure now. You can safely use O_DSYNC on AIX, the only special on AIX is, that it does not make a speed difference to O_SYNC. This is imho because the jfs only needs one sync write to the jfs journal for meta info in eighter case (so that nobody misunderstands: both perform excellent). Hmm. Does everyone run jfs on AIX, or are there other file systems available? The same issue should be raised for Linux (at least): have we tried test cases with both journaling and non-journaling file systems? Perhaps the flag choice would be markedly different for the different options? - Thomas ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
[HACKERS] Re: AW: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
Thomas Lockhart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: tried test cases with both journaling and non-journaling file systems? Perhaps the flag choice would be markedly different for the different options? Good point. Another reason we don't have enough data to nail this down yet. Anyway, the code is in there and people can run test cases if they please... regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
