From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jul 22 08:37:49 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D187A37B40D; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 08:37:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bast.unixathome.org (bast.unixathome.org [66.11.174.150])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 4330C43F85; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 08:37:49 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from dan@langille.org)
Received: from wocker (wocker.unixathome.org [192.168.0.99])
	by bast.unixathome.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id EE7203D29; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 11:37:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Dan Langille" <dan@langille.org>
To: Jason Stone <freebsd-performance@dfmm.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 11:37:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <3F1D2208.2124.52B03E6A@localhost>
Priority: normal
References: <20030721192645.GB61464@perrin.int.nxad.com>
In-reply-to: <20030721202338.C14379-100000@walter>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-description: Mail message body
cc: freebsd-database@freebsd.org
cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Tuning for PostGreSQL Database
X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Performance/tuning <freebsd-performance.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance>,
	<mailto:freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-performance>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-performance@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance>,
	<mailto:freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 15:37:50 -0000

On 21 Jul 2003 at 20:35, Jason Stone wrote:

> I feel like this is an extremely important point.  If softupdates changes
> the semantics of sync(2)/fsync(2), then it absolutely has to be off for a
> postgresql server because postgresql counts on fsync in order to make its
> durability guarantees.

If this means all FreeBSD-PostgreSQL users need to change their 
setup, we need to do something ASAP.  I'd first recommend getting the 
confirmation from the PostgreSQL team, then adjusting the PostgreSQL 
documenation and the FreeBSD port.

Does anyone feel this is urgent enough that they'll do something 
about it?
-- 
Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/