<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Nvme on StorageNews</title><link>https://storagenews.top/tags/nvme/</link><description>Recent content in Nvme on StorageNews</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://storagenews.top/tags/nvme/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>PostgreSQL storage: Why S3 fails WAL flushes</title><link>https://storagenews.top/posts/postgresql-storage-why-s3-fails-wal-flushes/</link><pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://storagenews.top/posts/postgresql-storage-why-s3-fails-wal-flushes/</guid><description>&lt;meta charset="utf-8">
&lt;!-- wp:paragraph {"className":"std-text"} -->
&lt;!-- /wp:paragraph -->
&lt;!-- wp:paragraph {"className":"std-text"} -->
&lt;p class="std-text">PostgreSQL stalls because &lt;strong>WAL flushes&lt;/strong> demand microsecond latency that cheap storage cannot provide.&lt;/p>
&lt;!-- /wp:paragraph -->
&lt;!-- wp:paragraph {"className":"std-text"} -->
&lt;p class="std-text">The prevailing thesis for 2026 is clear: attempting to force &lt;strong>S3 object storage&lt;/strong> to handle high-frequency transactional writes is a fundamental architectural error that sacrifices availability for false economy. As TechTarget notes, while AI and hybrid multi-cloud strategies drive cost governance, the physical reality of &lt;strong>disk I/O latency&lt;/strong> remains the ultimate bottleneck for database durability. Alasdair Brown&amp;#039;s analysis confirms that the primary challenge in running &lt;strong>Postgres&lt;/strong> is not the volume of bytes stored, but surviving the moments when the database must stop and wait for durable commits.&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>