> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> I have to agree with Alfred here: this does not sound like a feature,
> >> it sounds like a horrid hack. You're giving up *all* consistency
> >> guarantees for a performance gain that is really going to be pretty
> >> minimal in the WAL context.
>
> > It does not give up consistency. The db is still consistent, it is just
> > consistent from a few seconds ago, rather than commit time.
>
> No, it isn't consistent. Without the fsync you don't know what order
> the kernel will choose to plop down WAL log blocks in; you could end up
> with a corrupt log. (Actually, perhaps that could be worked around if
> the log blocks are suitably marked so that you can tell where the last
> sequentially valid one is. I haven't looked at the log structure in
> any detail...)
>
I am just suggesting that instead of flushing the log on every
transaction end, just do it every X seconds.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
