| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: file cloning in pg_upgrade and CREATE DATABASE |
| Date: | 2018-03-26 01:33:38 |
| Message-ID: | 9380bebc-3c16-42f0-d0e1-da7c235f8a58@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/21/18 22:38, Michael Paquier wrote:
> At least on Linux it is possible to rely on sync_file_range which is
> called via pg_flush_data, so it seems to me that we ought to roughly
> keep the loop working on FLUSH_DISTANCE, and replace the calls of
> read/write by copy_file_range. copyfile is only able to do a complete
> file copy, so we would also lose this property as well on Linux.
I have shown earlier in the thread that copy_file_range in one go is
still better than doing it in pieces.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2018-03-26 01:34:14 | Re: file cloning in pg_upgrade and CREATE DATABASE |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2018-03-26 00:43:21 | Re: Undesirable entries in typedefs list |