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: Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Date: 2005-06-02 05:17:26
Message-ID: 20050602051726.GA3694@surnet.cl (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 12:30:01AM -0400, Alon Goldshuv wrote:

> before that, let me just clarify that the performance improvements in
> the patch have nothing to do with the escaping mechanizm. Escapes
> could change. The performance gain in due to a buffered processing
> with minimal line/attribute buffer loads.

May I suggest you present them as separate issues and separate patches?
This way, a patch with the performance improvements is very likely to
get merged; simultaneously we can discuss changes to the escaping
mechanism until everyone agrees (or not) and then produce a patch as
appropiate.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]surnet.cl>)
Este mail se entrega garantizadamente 100% libre de sarcasmo.

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-06-02 06:00:17
Subject: Drop separate CRC32 implementations in ltree, tsearch, tsearch2?
Previous:From: Luke LonerganDate: 2005-06-02 05:16:34
Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?

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