Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Jochem van Dieten wrote:
>> Why only on an empty table? What is the problem with bypassing WAL on
>> any table as long as all files of that table are fsync'ed before
>> commit?

> Because adding rows to a table might modify existing pages, and if the
> COPY fails, you have to restore those pages to a consistent state, and
> make sure they are recovered for partial page writes, which we can't do
> without WAL.  With an initially empty table, you can just throw away the
> file system file.

You have also got to think about the effects on the table's indexes ...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: NOLOGGING option, or ? at 2005-06-01 14:14:42 from Bruce Momjian

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2005-06-01 15:55:46
	Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2005-06-01 15:31:31
	Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?