From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
---|---|
To: | "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL Advocacy" <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Unlogged vs. In-Memory |
Date: | 2011-05-13 21:04:42 |
Message-ID: | 4DCD569A020000250003D7A7@gw.wicourts.gov |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> I thought global temp tables were tables that existed as empty in
> every session and had per-session data.
Yeah -- they're not the *same* as unlogged tables. What makes it
*similar* to me is that there is one definition visible to all
sessions, changes are not logged, and data is not necessarily
written to disk during normal operations, and on a crash all data is
lost. The differences are that with unlogged tables all sessions
share the same data whereas with global temporary tables each
session has its own set of data, and on clean shutdown the unlogged
table will be saved for reload on startup.
-Kevin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2011-05-13 21:08:29 | Re: Crediting sponsors in release notes? |
Previous Message | Thom Brown | 2011-05-13 21:03:50 | Re: Unlogged vs. In-Memory |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2011-05-13 21:23:36 | Double ocurring Subplan |
Previous Message | Thom Brown | 2011-05-13 21:03:50 | Re: Unlogged vs. In-Memory |