Re: Unlogged tables, persistent kind

From: Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it>
To: simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unlogged tables, persistent kind
Date: 2011-04-25 18:00:28
Message-ID: 30910.44583.qm@web29008.mail.ird.yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> The amount of data loss on a big
> table will be <1% of the data loss
>caused by truncating the whole table.

If that 1% is random (not time/transaction related), usually you'd rather have an empty table. In other words: is a table that is not consistant with anything else in the db useful?

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-04-25 18:02:50 Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-04-25 17:57:47 Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning