Re: non-WAL btree?

From: "Jaime Casanova" <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>
To: "Alex Vinogradovs" <AVinogradovs(at)clearpathnet(dot)com>
Cc: "Joshua Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: non-WAL btree?
Date: 2008-08-01 21:38:21
Message-ID: 3073cc9b0808011438yf08a81cv35d707890510e1b6@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Alex Vinogradovs
<AVinogradovs(at)clearpathnet(dot)com> wrote:
> Isn't hash indexing implementation non-WAL ?
>

yes, but that's because no one thinks is worth the effort of making
them WAL logged while they keep slower than btree...

--
regards,
Jaime Casanova
Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL
Guayaquil - Ecuador
Cel. (593) 87171157

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jaime Casanova 2008-08-01 21:43:12 Re: non-WAL btree?
Previous Message Francisco Reyes 2008-08-01 20:50:21 Re: non-WAL btree?