Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
От | Ivan Voras |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ia8tvj$15r$1@dough.gmane.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement
compared to Oracle
Re: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 10/26/10 17:41, Merlin Moncure wrote: > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists@yahoo.it> wrote: >>> temp tables are not wal logged or >>> synced. Periodically they can be flushed to a permanent table. >> >> >> What do you mean with "Periodically they can be flushed to >> a permanent table"? Just doing >> >> insert into tabb select * from temptable >> > > yup, that's exactly what I mean -- this will give you more uniform In effect, when so much data is in temporary storage, a better option would be to simply configure "synchronous_commit = off" (better in the sense that the application would not need to be changed). The effects are almost the same - in both cases transactions might be lost but the database will survive.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: