Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC

[Peter Eisentraut]

Tom Lane writes:

> However, I can actually make a case for this: we are flushing out
> performance bugs in a new feature, ie WAL.

I haven't followed the jungle of numbers too closely.

Is it not the case that WAL + fsync is still faster than 7.0 + fsync and
WAL/no fsync is still faster than 7.0/no fsync?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut      [EMAIL PROTECTED]       http://yi.org/peter-e/


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly