The point of this fsync is to order FS disk writes to prevent data
corruption, so this fsync has to be synchronous and cannot be asynchronous
Given that we fix correctness, I believe that current results are
2018-04-13 2:48 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Ivan Rakov <ivan.glu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dmitriy,
> > fsync() is really slow operation - it's the main reason why FSYNC mode is
> > way slower than LOG_ONLY.
> > Fix includes extra fsyncs in necessary parts of code and nothing more.
> > Every part is important - at the beginning of the thread I described why.
> > 20% slow in benchmark doesn't mean than Ignite itself will become 20%
> > slower. Benchmark replays only "data loading" scenario. It signals that
> > maximum throughput with WAL enabled will be 20% slower. By the way, we
> > already have option to disable WAL in runtime for the period of data
> > loading.
> Ivan, I get it, but I am sure that you can do more things in parallel. Do
> we wait for the fsync call to complete? If yes, do we have to wait? Are
> there other performance optimizations you can add, considering that we are
> in LOG_ONLY or BACKGROUND modes and disk writes may be delayed.