Re: [SQL] Don't need transaction integrity - can I turn it off

"Oliver Elphick" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
>> Yes, we have no-fsync option. See FAQ.

> But that has to do with not forcing a sync to disk after every write.
> I've never heard of an ability to disable transactions; isn't every
> operation outside an explicitly-declared transaction made a single
> separate transaction by default?

It is, and I don't think there's any possibility of turning that off.
It's too tightly integrated with the cross-backend interlocking.
If you don't want transactions, and you don't want multiple backends,
maybe mySQL is what you need ;-)

BTW, if you're not too concerned about parallelism, one way to squeeze
a little more speed is to use explicit transactions *more*, not less.
The more stuff you get done between BEGIN and COMMIT, the less the
transaction overhead per useful operation...

regards, tom lane