| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | NikhilS <nikkhils(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: VLDB Features |
| Date: | 2007-12-15 07:44:56 |
| Message-ID: | 7907.1197704696@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
NikhilS <nikkhils(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Any errors which occur before doing the heap_insert should not require
> any recovery according to me.
A sufficient (though far from all-encompassing) rejoinder to that is
"triggers and CHECK constraints can do anything".
> The overhead of having a subtransaction per row is a very valid concern. But
> instead of using a per insert or a batch insert substraction, I am
> thinking that we can start off a subtraction and continue it till we
> encounter a failure.
What of failures that occur only at (sub)transaction commit, such as
foreign key checks?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gokulakannan Somasundaram | 2007-12-15 07:49:52 | Re: EXPLAIN ANALYZE printing logical and hardware I/O per-node |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-12-15 07:34:29 | Re: Negative LIMIT and OFFSET? |