Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences

From: Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences
Date: 2010-11-15 19:27:43
Message-ID: 4CE189AF.6020308@squeakycode.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On 11/15/2010 9:06 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> In 9.1, I'm hopeful that we'll have unlogged tables, which will even
> better than turning these parameters off, and for which I just posted
> a patch to -hackers. Instead of generating WAL and writing WAL to the
> OS and then NOT trying to make sure it hits the disk, we just won't
> generate it in the first place. But if PostgreSQL or the machine it's
> running on crashes, you won't need to completely blow away the cluster
> and start over; instead, the particular tables that you chose to
> create as unlogged will be truncated, and the rest of your data,
> including the system catalogs, will still be intact.
>

if I am reading this right means: we can run our db safely (with fsync
and full_page_writes enabled) except for tables of our choosing?

If so, I am very +1 for this!

-Andy

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-11-15 19:36:38 Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences
Previous Message Tobias Brox 2010-11-15 15:25:18 Re: Difference between explain analyze and real execution time