On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 1:49 PM, james <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Is there a way to force a WAL flush so that async commits (from other > connections) are flushed, short of actually updating a sacrificial row? > > Would be nice to do it without generating anything extra, even if it is > something that causes IO in the checkpoint. > > Am I right to think that an empty transaction won't do it, and nor will a > transaction that is just a NOTIFY? This was discussed in "[HACKERS] Pg_upgrade speed for many tables". It seemed like turning synchronous_commit back on and then creating an temp table was the preferred method to force a flush. Although I wonder if that behavior might be optimized away at some point. Cheers, Jeff -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
