Greg Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > * It does not check for errors (if it had, you might have realized the
> > other problem).
>
> All the test_fsync code needs to check for errors better; there have been
> multiple occasions where I've run that with quesiontable inpu
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
* It does not check for errors (if it had, you might have realized the
other problem).
All the test_fsync code needs to check for errors better; there have been
multiple occasions where I've run that with quesiontable input and it
didn't complain, it jus
Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The results I get now look fishy.
There are at least two things wrong with this program:
* It does not respect the alignment requirement for O_DIRECT buffers
(reportedly either 512 or 4096 bytes depending on filesystem).
* It does not check for errors (
I've been trying to optimize a Linux system where benchmarking suggests
large performance differences between the various wal_sync_method options
(with o_sync being the big winner). I started that by using
src/tools/fsync/test_fsync to get an idea what I was dealing with (and to
spot which dri
