On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:42 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > That's not necessarily an argument against this patch, which by the > way I have not reviewed. Even a 5% speedup on this kind of workload > is potentially worthwhile; everyone likes it when things go faster. > I'm just not convinced you can get very much more than that on a > realistic workload. Of course, I might be wrong.
Oh, incidentally -- in our internal testing, we found that wal_sync_method=open_datasync was significantly faster than wal_sync_method=fdatasync. You might find that open_datasync isn't much different from pmem_drain, even though they're both faster than fdatasync. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
