| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Steve Singer <ssinger(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: skip WAL on COPY patch |
| Date: | 2011-08-23 21:20:12 |
| Message-ID: | 1314134412.23681.7.camel@jdavis-ux.asterdata.local |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 15:05 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Steve Singer <ssinger(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info> writes:
> > The attached patch adds an option to the COPY command to skip writing
> > WAL when the following conditions are all met:
>
> > 1) The table is empty (zero size on disk)
> > 2) The copy command can obtain an access exclusive lock on the table
> > with out blocking.
> > 3) The WAL isn't needed for replication
>
> Exposing this as a user-visible option seems a seriously bad idea.
In that particular way, I agree. But it might be useful if there were a
more general declarative option like "BULKLOAD". We might then use that
information for a number of optimizations that make sense for large
loads.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-08-24 00:48:30 | Another extensions bug |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-08-23 21:14:44 | Re: 9.1rc1: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(item_width > 0)", File: "costsize.c", Line: 3274) |