From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jul 22 11:05:56 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 EA27E37B401
	for <freebsd-performance@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 22 Jul 2003 11:05:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 156.Red-80-35-166.pooles.rima-tde.net
	(156.Red-80-35-166.pooles.rima-tde.net [80.35.166.156])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D37543F85
	for <freebsd-performance@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 22 Jul 2003 11:05:56 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from sjmudd@pobox.com)
Received: by unicorn.wl0.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 485113158; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 20:05:53 +0200 (CEST)
To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10307191344080.16986-100000@misery.sdf.com>
	<20030721043501.F14379-100000@walter> <20030721192643.GD55392@nasby.net>
From: Simon J Mudd <sjmudd@pobox.com>
Date: 22 Jul 2003 20:05:53 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20030721192643.GD55392@nasby.net>
Message-ID: <86znj6l9mm.fsf@unicorn.wl0.org>
Lines: 29
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
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 18:05:57 -0000

jim@nasby.net ("Jim C. Nasby") writes:

> > On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Tom Samplonius wrote:
> > > Softupdates on, async off.  Softupdates is just a better async.
> > 
> > postgresql fsync's all its files before returning from a commit in order
> > to ensure durability, right?  Does softupdates interfere with the
> > functioning of sync(2)/fsync(2)?
>  
> No, afaik it only fsync's the write-ahead-logs.

Someone else mentioned Qmail. I use Postfix and I know the author
relies on fsync semantics before confirming the acceptance of email.
I'm sure Qmail (and sendmail, ...) does the same.  They should do -
the RFC requires this (that mail can't be lost once it is accepted for
delivery).

Therefore I think we are confusing 2 different issues.  The effect of
soft-updates (which tries to reorder writes to ensure FS recover is
easier) and sync/fsync which only returns when the FS or file have
been flushed to disk.

I would guess that PostGreSQL uses fsync() and softupdates do not
effect the fsync() semantics.

Or am I missing something?

Simon