| From: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
| Cc: | "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>, "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Savepoints |
| Date: | 2002-01-24 16:34:29 |
| Message-ID: | EKEJJICOHDIEMGPNIFIJKEFBGJAA.Inoue@tpf.co.jp |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mikheev, Vadim
>
> How about: use overwriting smgr + put old records into rollback
> segments - RS - (you have to keep them somewhere till TX's running
> anyway) + use WAL only as REDO log (RS will be used to rollback TX'
> changes and WAL will be used for RS/data files recovery).
> Something like what Oracle does.
As long as we use no overwriting manager
1) Rollback(data) isn't needed in case of a db crash.
2) Rollback(data) isn't needed to cancal a transaction entirely.
3) We don't need to mind the transaction size so much.
We can't use the db any longer if a REDO recovery fails now.
Under overwriting smgr we can't use the db any longer either
if rollback fails. How could PG be not less reliable than now ?
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2002-01-24 16:40:54 | Re: PostgreSQL crashes with Qmail-SQL |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2002-01-24 16:22:45 | Re: Add OR REPLACE clauses to non-FUNCTION object creat |