From: | Samuel Stearns <SStearns(at)internode(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jonathan Hoover <jhoover(at)yahoo-inc(dot)com>, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu> |
Subject: | Re: Disk Performance Problem on Large DB |
Date: | 2010-11-05 03:44:57 |
Message-ID: | 68B59BEDCD36854AADBDF17E91B2937A0783A71E3F@EXCHMAIL.staff.internode.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Yep!
Coming from previous Oracle job into Postgres, discovering the transactable stuff, is indeed, pretty cool.
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Marlowe [mailto:scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com]
Sent: Friday, 5 November 2010 2:12 PM
To: Samuel Stearns
Cc: Jonathan Hoover; pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org; Kenneth Marshall
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Disk Performance Problem on Large DB
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Samuel Stearns
<SStearns(at)internode(dot)com(dot)au> wrote:
> TRUNCATE doesn't generate any rollback data, which makes it lightning fast. It just de-allocates the data pages used by the table.
Also truncate, like nearly everything in pgsql, can be rolled back. I
still remember showing my oracle co-dbas in my last job freak out when
I showed them things like
begin;
update table yada...
truncate table;
rollback;
or
begin;
drop index xyz;
explain select ...
rollback;
transactable everything is pretty cool. (note database and tablespace
craete / drop are the only things that aren't transactable, which
makes some sense.)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonathan Hoover | 2010-11-05 03:46:24 | Re: Disk Performance Problem on Large DB |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2010-11-05 03:41:58 | Re: Disk Performance Problem on Large DB |