Re: changeset generation v5-01 - Patches & git tree
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: changeset generation v5-01 - Patches & git tree |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3527.1372702615@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: changeset generation v5-01 - Patches & git tree (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: changeset generation v5-01 - Patches & git tree
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > So the question is, do we take the overhead of the new index (which > means overhead on DML operations -- supposedly rare) or do we take the > overhead of larger WAL records (which means overhead on all DDL > operations)? > Note we can make either thing apply to only people running logical > replication. I don't believe you can have or not have an index on pg_class as easily as all that. The choice would have to be frozen at initdb time, so people would have to pay the overhead if they thought there was even a small possibility that they'd want logical replication later. Flipping the content of WAL records might not be a terribly simple thing to do either, but at least in principle it could be done during a postmaster restart, without initdb. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: