From: | Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Jon Nelson <jnelson+pgsql(at)jamponi(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgres INSERT performance and scalability |
Date: | 2011-09-20 05:04:56 |
Message-ID: | 4E781EF8.3000400@ringerc.id.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 09/20/2011 09:21 AM, Jon Nelson wrote:
> Isn't the WAL basically COW?
Nope, it's a lot more like a filesystem journal - though it includes all
data, not just metadata like filesystem journals usually do.
Now, you could argue that PostgreSQL uses a copy-on-write like system to
maintain row versions so that already-running statements (or
SERIALIZABLE transactions) don't see data from the future and to
maintain rollback data for uncommitted transactions. It's the *new* data
that gets written to the WAL, though, not the old data.
(OK, if you have full_page_writes enabled you might get a mix of old and
new data written to WAL, but that's an implementation detail).
--
Craig Ringer
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gunnlaugur Þór Briem | 2011-09-20 09:15:30 | Re: Constraint exclusion on UNION ALL subqueries with WHERE conditions |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2011-09-20 04:49:50 | Re: where is max_fsm_pages in PG9.0? |