| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, marcin mank <marcin(dot)mank(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: unlogged tables |
| Date: | 2010-11-17 19:16:06 |
| Message-ID: | 17317.1290021366@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Robert is probably going to object that he wanted to prevent any
>> fsyncing for unlogged tables, but the discussion over in pgsql-general
>> is crystal clear that people do NOT want to lose unlogged data over
>> a clean shutdown and restart. If all it takes to do that is to refrain
>> from lobotomizing the checkpoint logic for unlogged tables, I say we
>> should refrain.
> I think that's absolutely a bad idea.
The customer is always right, and I think we are hearing loud and clear
what the customers want. Please let's not go out of our way to create
a feature that isn't what they want.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-11-17 19:21:44 | Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #5650: Postgres service showing as stopped when in fact it is running |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2010-11-17 19:11:52 | Re: changing MyDatabaseId |