From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Chris Bitmead <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: postgres 7.2 features. |
Date: | 2000-07-11 04:19:53 |
Message-ID: | 200007110419.AAA12897@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> The bottom line is that the original postgres time-travel implementation
> was totally cost-free. Actually it may have even speeded things
> up since vacuum would have less work to do. Can you convince me that
> triggers can compare anywhere near for performance? I can't see how.
> All I'm asking is don't damage anything that is in postgres now that
> is relevant to time-travel in your quest for WAL....
Basically, time travel was getting in the way of more requested features
that had to be added. Keeping it around has a cost, and no one felt the
cost was worth the benefit. You may disagree, but at the time, that was
the consensus, and I assume it still is.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Robinson | 2000-07-11 04:20:24 | Re: [SQL] Re: [GENERAL] lztext and compression ratios... |
Previous Message | Chris Bitmead | 2000-07-11 04:01:50 | Re: Storage Manager (was postgres 7.2 features.) |