Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: NOLOGGING option, or ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 13658.1117635505@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: NOLOGGING option, or ? (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Re: NOLOGGING option, or ? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Not unless you are proposing to change COPY to acquire a lock strong >> enough to lock out other writers to the table for the duration ... > Well, if the table is initally empty, what harm is there in locking the > table? You cannot *know* whether it is empty unless you lock the table before you look. So your argument is circular. I think this only makes sense as an explicit option to COPY, one of the effects of which would be to take a stronger lock than COPY normally does. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: