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

Re: 8.4 open item: copy performance regression?

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Alan Li <ali(at)truviso(dot)com>,Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>,Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>,Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>,Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>,Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>,PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 8.4 open item: copy performance regression?
Date: 2009-06-22 15:18:42
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > Unfortunately, WAL bypass also requires not being in archive mode with
> > no way to turn that off w/o a server restart, aiui.
> Well, if you're trying to archive then you certainly wouldn't want WAL
> off, so I'm failing to see where this thread is going ...

I disagree.  I'd love to be able to say "please bypass WAL logging for
this bulk load" because I know that I'll pick up the data during my next
full dump and I can reload it from original if I get disrupted before
then.  This is especially true when you're doing bulk loads of static or
reference data from another data source.



In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2009-06-22 15:22:27
Subject: Re: security checks for largeobjects?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-06-22 15:14:24
Subject: Re: 8.4 open item: copy performance regression?

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