On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Matthew Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I had assumed that the overhead would come from synchronous
> > metadata incurring writes of at least the inode, block bitmap
> > and probably an indirect block for each syscall.
>
> No Unix that I've ever hea
On Sat, 24 Feb 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I am confused why mmap() is better than writing to a real file.
>
> > It isn't, except that it allows to initialise the logfile in
> > one syscall, without first allocating and zeroing (and hence
> > dirtying) 16Mb of memory.
>
> Uh, the existing code d
Matthew Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I had assumed that the overhead would come from synchronous
> metadata incurring writes of at least the inode, block bitmap
> and probably an indirect block for each syscall.
No Unix that I've ever heard of forces metadata to disk after each
"write"
