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

Re: beta testing version

From: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: beta testing version
Date: 2000-12-01 19:15:36
Message-ID: 3.0.1.32.20001201111536.017b02e0@mail.pacifier.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
At 11:02 AM 12/1/00 -0800, Nathan Myers wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 06:39:57AM -0800, Don Baccus wrote:
>> 
>> Probably the best answer to the "what does WAL get us, if it doesn't
>> get us full recoverability" questions is to simply say "it's a 
>> prerequisite to getting full recoverability, PG 7.1 sets the foundation 
>> and later work will get us there".
>
>Not to quibble, but for most of us, the answer to Don's question is:
>"It gives a ~20x speedup over 7.0."  That's pretty valuable to some of us.
>If it turns out to be useful for other stuff, that's gravy.

Oh, but given that power failures eat disks anyway, you can just run PG 7.0
with -F and be just as fast as PG 7.1, eh?  With no theoretical loss in
safety?  Where's your faith in all that doom and gloom you've been 
spreading? :) :)

You're right, of course, we'll get roughly -F performance while maintaining
a much more comfortable level of risk than you get with -F.



- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
  Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
  Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
  http://donb.photo.net.

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Nathan MyersDate: 2000-12-01 19:23:59
Subject: Re: beta testing version
Previous:From: Nathan MyersDate: 2000-12-01 19:09:27
Subject: Re: beta testing version

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