https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459373 User max@novell.com added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459373#c2 Reinhard Max <max@novell.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|P5 - None |P4 - Low --- Comment #2 from Reinhard Max <max@novell.com> 2008-12-16 05:13:08 MST --- Unlike the other distros we don't build SQLite with dirsync disabled, but this shouldn't have much impact on performance, as the dirsync is only done once per temporary file that SQLite creates. If I understood the kernel gurus right, our kernel makes the sync() call actually do what it is supposed to, which makes it slower, but safer. I wouldn't want to sacrifice these data safety features just to win some performance crowns. But internal discussions of the cited test results have also shown that there does indeed seem to be a performance problem in the kernel, which is currently being investigated. So, I'll leave this one open until that bug has been fixed and it has been verified that SQLite then is only as much slower as you can expect from a non-disabled dirsync and an actually working sync() call. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.