Re: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ivan Voras <ivoras(at)freebsd(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Date: 2010-10-28 03:32:25
Message-ID: 3989.1288236745@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Gee, I wonder if it would possible for PG to automatically do an
> asynchronous commit of any transaction which touches only temp tables.

Hmm ... do we need a commit at all in such a case? If our XID has only
gone into temp tables, I think we need to write to clog, but we don't
really need a WAL entry, synced or otherwise.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-10-28 03:38:23 Re: Composite Types and Function Parameters
Previous Message Daniel Farina 2010-10-28 03:13:13 Re: An unfortunate logging behavior when (mis)configuring recovery.conf

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rob Wultsch 2010-10-28 03:43:52 Re: BBU Cache vs. spindles
Previous Message Divakar Singh 2010-10-28 03:08:53 Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle