Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 04:35:31PM -0500, Jan Wieck wrote: > > For sure the sync() needs to be replaced by the discussed fsync() of > > recently written files. And I think the algorithm how much and how often > > to flush can be significantly improved. But after all, this does not > > change the real checkpointing at all, and the general framework having a > > separate process is what we probably want. > > Why is the sync() needed at all? My understanding was that it > was only needed in case of a checkpoint.
He found that write() itself didn't encourage the kernel to write the buffers to disk fast enough. I think the final solution will be to use fsync or O_SYNC. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
