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

Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>,Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)surnet(dot)cl>,Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Date: 2005-06-01 22:37:51
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On K, 2005-06-01 at 18:05 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> What we could do is to do no-WAL automatically for empty tables (like
> when a database is first loaded),

You forget that some databases use WAL for PITR / replication and doing
it automatically there would surely mess up their replica.

How is index creation handeled if it is not logged in WAL ? 
 - is it not automatically WAL'ed ? 
 - Must one recreate indexes after PITR or failover ?

>  and use the flag for cases where the
> tables is not zero pages.  The fact is that database loads are a prefect
> case for this optimization and old dumps are not going to have that flag
> anyway, and automatic is better if we can do it.

Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2005-06-01 22:39:59
Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-06-01 22:37:07
Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group