Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Hannu Krosing
Тема Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Дата
Msg-id 1117627855.4772.21.camel@fuji.krosing.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на NOLOGGING option, or ?  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On K, 2005-06-01 at 00:01 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Recent test results have shown a substantial performance improvement
> (+25%) if WAL logging is disabled for large COPY statements. This is to
> be expected, though has a price attached: losing the ability to crash
> recover data loaded in this manner.

Not only recover the DB itself but also having a hot standby (and
hopefully a read-only replica some time in the future).

> There are two parts to this proposal. First, when and whether to do this
> at all. Second, syntax and invocation.

I think this should be a decision done when creating a table, just like
TEMP tables. So you always know if a certain table is or is not
safe/replicated/recoverable.

This has also the advantage of requiring no changes to actual COPY and
INSERT commands.

-- 
Hannu Krosing <hannu@skype.net>



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Simon Riggs
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Следующее
От: Hannu Krosing
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Tablespace-level Block Size Definitions