Re: [Bizgres-general] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>, Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Bizgres-general] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and
Date: 2005-12-26 12:03:27
Message-ID: 1135598607.2964.702.camel@localhost.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, 2005-12-24 at 10:32 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:

> An ALTER TABLE SET LOGGED/UNLOGGED switch might have some merit, but
> please don't muddy the waters by confusing this with temp-table
> status.

I would not be against such a table-level switch, but the exact
behaviour would need to be specified more closely before this became a
TODO item, IMHO.

If someone has a 100 GB table, they would not appreciate the table being
truncated if a transaction to load 1 GB of data aborts, forcing recovery
of the 100 GB table.

Best Regards, Simon Riggs

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2005-12-26 12:22:12 Re: [Bizgres-general] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2005-12-26 11:04:26 Re: Incremental Backup Script