| From: | "Jeroen T(dot) Vermeulen" <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option |
| Date: | 2007-02-27 04:05:45 |
| Message-ID: | 20053.125.24.237.231.1172549145.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, February 27, 2007 06:06, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> Why do we want this?? Because some apps have *lots* of data and many
>> really don't care whether they lose a few records. Honestly, I've met
>> people that want this, even after 2 hours of discussion and
>> understanding. Plus probably lots of MySQLers also.
>
> Most users will take speed over data loss any day. Whether we want to
> admit it or not.
In that case, wouldn't it make just as much sense to have an equivalent
for this special transaction mode on individual statements, without
transaction context? I'm guessing that who don't really know or want
transactions would never start one, running lots of loose statements
instead that otherwise get committed individually.
Jeroen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-02-27 04:07:10 | Re: [HACKERS] COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option (patch) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-02-27 04:04:07 | Re: COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option |