Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: NOLOGGING option, or ? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 13658.1117635505@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| 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: