From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache |
Date: | 2010-06-23 20:25:44 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikTFG8-4sfJsQ16Fdu1TzZOh_zUtb-QuBPuo9jF@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> writes:
>> > Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> >> a) Eliminate WAL logging entirely
>
> If we elimiate WAL logging, that means a reinstall is required for even
> a postmaster crash, which is a new non-durable behavior.
>
> Also, we just added wal_level = minimal, which might end up being a poor
> name choice of we want wal_level = off in PG 9.1. Perhaps we should
> have used wal_level = crash_safe in 9.0.
>
> I have added the following TODO:
>
> Consider a non-crash-safe wal_level that eliminates WAL activity
>
> * http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2010-06/msg00300.php
I don't think we need a system-wide setting for that. I believe that
the unlogged tables I'm working on will handle that case.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2010-06-23 20:27:38 | Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-06-23 20:16:10 | Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache |