Re: [Quickfix-developers] FileLog, FileStore flush

[Alexey Z. <ale...@gm...>]

Caleb,

Thank you for the reply.

Unfortunately speeding is the highest priority for us and hardware 
upgrade may not to help much.

I added disabling of the flushing for the FileLog class because these 
files are the biggest.
If your are interesting in these changes I'll send them.

-- 
Regards,
		Alexey Zubko



Caleb Epstein wrote:

> On 10/7/05, *Alexey Zubko* <ale...@gm... 
> <mailto:ale...@gm...>> wrote:
>
>     I want to try to eliminate these flush calls from the classes.
>     Is it potential danger? Does anyone have such experience?
>     Is it better or faster to use a SQL server to store logs?
>
>
> It is definitely a potential danger.  Any data that hasn't been 
> flushed to disk (notably the .seqnums and also perhaps the .outgoing 
> file) won't be written to disk if your process dies unexpectedly or 
> the machine reboots.  When you recover, your application may end up 
> re-processing messages it has already received.  OIr perhaps even 
> worse, unable to resend messages that the counterparty has not received.
>
> This is a classic safety vs. speed tradeoff.  The right answer depends 
> on the requirements of your own system, and the default implementation 
> of these classes in QuickFIX takes the safest possible (but also 
> slowest) approach to guarantee recoverability.
>
> -- 
> Caleb Epstein
> caleb dot epstein at gmail dot com