> there is a way to 'cheat' : either use fsync = off in > postgresql (that sucks), or try a writeback enabled raid controller. > In both cases you're taking a risk, but it's rather low in > the second one.
That's not entirely correct. fsync=off is pretty much the same thing you have with MyISAM, so if you're fine with that, you shuld be fine with fsync=off. However, if you use a writeback enabled RAID controller (*with* a battery backup of course - if you have one without a battery, someone ripped you off), you do *not* take a bigger risk. You will get almost the performance of fsync=off without any real risk. This is really the only option for *any* database system if you want both performance and stability. > These two cheats both remove the sync wait created by the > transactions on the 'WAL' (journal) files on postgresql. No. fsync=off removes *all* fsync, but the WAL does not necessarily use it. WAL can also use OPEN_SYNC, OPEN_DSYNC etc, in which case it's really not affected by fsync=off. However, all data file access during checkpoints and such things also fsync, so you'll definitly get more performance (at a risk) by turning it off. //Magnus ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
