Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)surnet(dot)cl>
To: Alon Goldshuv <agoldshuv(at)greenplum(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Date: 2005-06-02 03:41:29
Message-ID: 20050602034129.GA32286@surnet.cl (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 10:35:30AM -0700, Alon Goldshuv wrote:

> 2) A modified command syntax for introducing a direct single row error
> handling. By direct I mean - a row that if rejected from within the COPY
> command context does not throw an error and rollsback the whole transaction.
> Instead the error is caught and recorded elsewhere, maybe in some error
> table, with some more information that can later on be retrieved. The
> following rows continue to be processed. This way there is barely any error
> handling overhead.

Is there any idea on exactly how would this be done?  Do you plan on
using savepoints to implement it?  I fail to see how is this "barely any
overhead".  Savepoints are not that expensive but they are not free either.
(No, I haven't measured it.)

-- 
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]surnet.cl>)
"Oh, great altar of passive entertainment, bestow upon me thy discordant images
at such speed as to render linear thought impossible" (Calvin a la TV)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-06-02 03:54:08
Subject: Re: Backslash handling in strings
Previous:From: Luke LonerganDate: 2005-06-02 03:35:57
Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group