On Monday 08 February 2010 19:34:01 Greg Stark wrote: > On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 4:53 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 10:09 PM, Alvaro Herrera > > > >> Yeah, it seems there are two patches here -- one is the addition of > >> fsync_fname() and the other is the fsync_prepare stuff. > > Sorry, I'm just catching up on my mail from FOSDEM this past weekend. > > I had come to the same conclusion as Greg that I might as well just > commit it with Tom's "pg_flush_data()" name and we can decide later if > and when we have pg_fsync_start()/pg_fsync_finish() whether it's worth > keeping two apis or not. > > So I was just going to commit it like that but I discovered last week > that I don't have cvs write access set up yet. I'll commit it as soon > as I generate a new ssh key and Dave installs it, etc. I intentionally > picked a small simple patch that nobody was waiting on because I knew > there was a risk of delays like this and the paperwork. I'm nearly > there. Do you still want me to split the patches into two or do you want to do it yourself? One in multiple versions for the directory fsync and another one for 9.0? Andres -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
