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

Re: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ivan Voras <ivoras(at)freebsd(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Date: 2010-10-28 03:32:25
Message-ID: 3989.1288236745@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Gee, I wonder if it would possible for PG to automatically do an
> asynchronous commit of any transaction which touches only temp tables.

Hmm ... do we need a commit at all in such a case?  If our XID has only
gone into temp tables, I think we need to write to clog, but we don't
really need a WAL entry, synced or otherwise.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Rob WultschDate: 2010-10-28 03:43:52
Subject: Re: BBU Cache vs. spindles
Previous:From: Divakar SinghDate: 2010-10-28 03:08:53
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-28 03:38:23
Subject: Re: Composite Types and Function Parameters
Previous:From: Daniel FarinaDate: 2010-10-28 03:13:13
Subject: Re: An unfortunate logging behavior when (mis)configuring recovery.conf

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