From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache |
Date: | 2010-06-23 20:43:06 |
Message-ID: | 27712.1277325786@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I don't think we need a system-wide setting for that. I believe that
>> the unlogged tables I'm working on will handle that case.
> Aren't they going to be truncated at startup? If the entire system is
> running without WAL, we would only need to do that in case of an
> unclean shutdown wouldn't we?
The problem with a system-wide no-WAL setting is it means you can't
trust the system catalogs after a crash. Which means you are forced to
use initdb to recover from any crash, in return for not a lot of savings
(for typical usages where there's not really much churn in the
catalogs). I tend to agree with Robert that a way to not log content
updates for individual user tables is likely to be much more useful in
practice.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-06-23 20:45:09 | Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-06-23 20:27:40 | Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache |