From: | Vincenzo Romano <vincenzo(dot)romano(at)notorand(dot)it> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | |
Date: | 2013-07-12 11:23:40 |
Message-ID: | CAHjZ2x7AMebB4dVoW9FWRb3NQde-_zwbP5eAphJ=-3ZAD8+VMQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi all
I'm making some experiments with table archiving and I'd like to
"replace" a full table F with an empty one E.
In order to do this I see only one way:
ALTER TABLE F RENAME TO T;
ALTER TABLE E RENAME TO F;
ALTER TABLE T RENAME TO E; -- optional
This implies there's a moment when the full table doesn't exist.
Would a transaction enclosure ensure that the table F will be always
available to all clients?
Thanks.
--
Vincenzo Romano - NotOrAnd.IT
Information Technologies
--
NON QVIETIS MARIBVS NAVTA PERITVS
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | shankar.kotamarthy@gmail.com | 2013-07-12 11:56:23 | pg_upgrade could not create catalog dump while upgrading from 9.0 to 9.2 |
Previous Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2013-07-12 11:05:36 | Re: How can you get "WAL segment has already been removed" when doing synchronous replication ?! |