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

Re: how many record versions

From: Marc Slemko <marcs(at)znep(dot)com>
To: David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: how many record versions
Date: 2004-05-24 06:23:28
Message-ID: Pine.NEB.4.53.0405232312440.13573@rhombus.znep.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general
On Mon, 24 May 2004, David Garamond wrote:

> Manfred Koizar wrote:
> > You mean InnoDB cannot handle the load?
>
> Perhaps it's more appropriate to say that the disk becomes the bottleneck.

Was this attempting to do each update in a separate transaction?

If so, that is certainly expected, with whatever disk based transactional
database you use.  With innodb, you could hack around it by configuring
innodb not to flush its log to disk at every transaction, obviously at
the risk of loosing data if something crashes.

From what I have seen, I would expect innodb's multiversioning to work
better for the use you describe than postgresql's due how it implements
undo logs for updates.  However, there could well be other differences
that could make postgresql work better for your application depending on
exactly what issues you are seeing.

In response to

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-05-24 06:27:37
Subject: Re: dump / restore questions
Previous:From: David GaramondDate: 2004-05-24 06:03:54
Subject: Re: how many record versions

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