Re: [Bizgres-general] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and
От | Qingqing Zhou |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [Bizgres-general] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and |
Дата | |
Msg-id | doiggp$68a$1@news.hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE? (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Greg Stark" <gsstark@mit.edu> wrote > > But I don't see turning on and off the WAL on a per-transaction basis to > be > useful. Every transaction in the system is affected by the WAL status of > every > other transaction working with the same tables. It doesn't serve any > purpose > to have one transaction bypassing the WAL while everyone else does WAL > logging > for the same table; they're all going to lose if the system crashes. > Sure, so a minimal amount xlog is required. And to make finished transaction durable, issue a checkpoint. > It seems to me the only rational way to approach this is to have a > per-table > flag that sets that table to be non-logged. Essentially changing a table's > behaviour to that of a temporary table except that other transactions can > see > it. If the system crashes the table is truncated on system restore. > > The only problem I have with this is that it smells too much like MySQL > MyISAM > tables... > Table are related, so table A references table B. So set a per-table flag is hard to use or doesn't work. Regards, Qingqing
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: