From: | Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: COPY with no WAL, in certain circumstances |
Date: | 2007-01-06 18:41:57 |
Message-ID: | 20070106184157.GC3022@timbira.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> As discussed on -hackers, its possible to avoid writing any WAL at all
> for COPY in these circumstances:
>
Cool.
> The enclosed patch implements this, as discussed. There is no user
> interface to enable/disable, just as with CTAS and CREATE INDEX; no
> docs, just code comments.
>
IMHO, this deserves an GUC parameter (use_wal_in_copy?). Because a lot
of people use COPY because it's faster than INSERT but expects that it
will be in WAL. The default would be use_wal_in_copy = true.
--
Euler Taveira de Oliveira
http://www.timbira.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-01-06 19:01:21 | Re: COPY with no WAL, in certain circumstances |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-01-06 18:05:01 | Re: Parsing ambiguity for ORDER BY ... NULLS FIRST/LAST |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-01-06 19:01:21 | Re: COPY with no WAL, in certain circumstances |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-01-06 17:54:03 | Re: COPY with no WAL, in certain circumstances |