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
This has also the advantage of requiring no changes to actual COPY and
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Hannu Krosing||Date: 2005-06-01 12:38:39|
|Subject: Re: Tablespace-level Block Size Definitions|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2005-06-01 12:03:25|
|Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?|