| From: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Lukas Smith <smith(at)pooteeweet(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Jochem van Dieten <jochemd(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |
| Date: | 2006-06-22 19:55:52 |
| Message-ID: | 20060622195552.GA19158@fetter.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 07:01:38PM +0200, Lukas Smith wrote:
> Jochem van Dieten wrote:
>
> >make the session handler smarter? And if you can't do that, put
> >some logic in the session table that turns an update without
> >changes into a no-op?
>
> err isnt that one the job of the database?
By no means. Even if there were zero overhead for this, which there
couldn't be, you'd have a real problem auditing attempted actions.
This would be a very big problem when trying to track down a rogue app
and/or a denial of service attack.
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666
Skype: davidfetter
Remember to vote!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2006-06-22 20:00:50 | Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2 |
| Previous Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2006-06-22 19:43:33 | Re: xlog viewer proposal |