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

Re: switch UNLOGGED to LOGGED

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: switch UNLOGGED to LOGGED
Date: 2011-05-07 02:25:09
Message-ID: BANLkTikuCfwG5=jML_=bXjq7yLKHx8uGjQ@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 4:13 AM, Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it> wrote:
>> Maybe you should change  xl_act_commit to have a separate list of rels to
>> drop the init fork for  (instead of mixing those with the list of files to
>> drop as a  whole).
>
> I tried to follow your suggestion, thank you very much.

I have to admit I don't like this approach very much.  I can't see
adding 4 bytes to every commit record for this feature.

> 3) Should we have a "cascade" option? I don't know if I have to handle
> inherited tables and other dependent objects

Look at the way ALTER TABLE [ONLY] works for other action types, and copy it.

> 4) During the check for dependencies problems, I stop as soon as I find an
> error; would it be enough?

It's a bit awkwardly phrased the way you have it.  I would suggest
something like:

ERROR:  constraints on permanent tables may reference only permanent tables
HINT:  constraint %s

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-05-07 02:25:48
Subject: Re: switch UNLOGGED to LOGGED
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-05-07 02:03:36
Subject: Re: Large Objects versus transactional behavior

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