Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?

From: "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Date: 2005-06-02 05:16:34
Message-ID: BEC3E442.6C81%llonergan@greenplum.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Steve,

Oops. Example below should have read differently:

> Sample with 2 identical rows (with binary representations depicted between
> <>):
> Blahblah<0xaa>blahblah<0x09>blahblah<0x00>blahblah<0xaa>Blahblah<0xaa>blahbl
> ah<0x09>blahblah<0x00>blahblah<0xaa>

Blahblah<0x0a>blahblah<0x09>blahblah<0x00>blahblah<0xaa>Blahblah<0x0a>blahbl
ah<0x09>blahblah<0x00>blahblah<0xaa>

This would result in the load of two records each of which would look like
this (when printed on a typical terminal):

Blahblah
blahblah blahblah

Luke

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2005-06-02 05:17:26 Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Previous Message Alon Goldshuv 2005-06-02 04:30:01 Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?