Joe Mistachkin [mailto:joe at mistachkin.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 3, 2015 10:35 AM
> To: 'General Discussion of SQLite Database'
> Cc: Howard Kapustein
> Subject: RE: [sqlite] NtFlushBuffersFileEx for SQLITE_SYNC_DATAONLY
> onWindows ?
>
>
> Howard Kapustein wrote:
> >
smoothest to be accepted as a patch.
- Howard
-Original Message-
From: Joe Mistachkin [mailto:j...@mistachkin.com]
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2015 10:35 AM
To: 'General Discussion of SQLite Database'
Cc: Howard Kapustein
Subject: RE: [sqlite] NtFlushBuffersFileEx for SQLITE_SYNC
On 4/6/15, Howard Kapustein wrote:
>
> I'm trying to understand (a) if this has been considered,
Did not know that this interface existed until you brought it up :-)
> (b) if it's
> planned,
Not currently planned.
> (c) if I wanted to hack it myself, do the resident experts have
> any
> Our experience with various Unix flavors teaches us that data-only sync
> does not have a performance advantage over a full sync.
At first glance, this seems surprising. What is the typical split
between fsync'ed writes that are changing the file size versus such
that are not changing the file
Howard Kapustein wrote:
>
> Has anyone considered supporting SQLITE_SYNC_DATAONLY on Windows using
> NtFlushBuffersFileEx?
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/hh967720(v=vs.85).a
spx
>
Our experience with various Unix flavors teaches us that data-only sync
does not have
5 matches
Mail list logo
