Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm just wondering why we do not use fsync() to flush data/index > pages.
There isn't any efficient way to do that AFAICS. The process that wants to do the checkpoint hasn't got any way to know just which files need to be sync'd. Even if it did know, it's not clear to me that we can portably assume that process A issuing an fsync on a file descriptor F it's opened for file X will force to disk previous writes issued against the same physical file X by a different process B using a different file descriptor G. sync() is surely overkill, in that it writes out dirty kernel buffers that might have nothing at all to do with Postgres. But I don't see how to do better. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster