From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Oliver Elphick" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Hamid Khoshnevis <hamid(at)emarq(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [SQL] Don't need transaction integrity - can I turn it off |
Date: | 1999-08-27 13:45:11 |
Message-ID: | 6401.935761511@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
"Oliver Elphick" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
>> Yes, we have no-fsync option. See FAQ.
> But that has to do with not forcing a sync to disk after every write.
> I've never heard of an ability to disable transactions; isn't every
> operation outside an explicitly-declared transaction made a single
> separate transaction by default?
It is, and I don't think there's any possibility of turning that off.
It's too tightly integrated with the cross-backend interlocking.
If you don't want transactions, and you don't want multiple backends,
maybe mySQL is what you need ;-)
BTW, if you're not too concerned about parallelism, one way to squeeze
a little more speed is to use explicit transactions *more*, not less.
The more stuff you get done between BEGIN and COMMIT, the less the
transaction overhead per useful operation...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-08-27 14:22:29 | Re: [SQL] Don't need transaction integrity - can I turn it off |
Previous Message | José Soares | 1999-08-27 13:15:01 | Re: [SQL] Doubts in timespan |