Re: Unlogged vs. In-Memory

From: "Jehan-Guillaume (ioguix) de Rorthais" <ioguix(at)free(dot)fr>
To: damien clochard <damien(at)dalibo(dot)info>
Cc: Roy Hann <specially(at)processed(dot)almost(dot)meat>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unlogged vs. In-Memory
Date: 2011-05-05 12:36:07
Message-ID: 4DC299B7.4090807@free.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

On 05/05/2011 14:29, damien clochard wrote:
> Le 04/05/2011 13:38, Roy Hann a écrit :
>> Joshua Berkus wrote:
>>
>>> When doing PR, it's more important to use terms people recognize than to use
>>> terms which are perfectly accurate. Nobody expects a news article to
>>> be perfectly accurate anyway.
>>>
>>> However, I posted this because I think that several folks in the community feel
>>> that this is going too far into the land of marketese, and I want to
>>> hash it out and get consensus before we start pitching 9.1 final.
>>
>> Call 'em table-valued variables.
>>
>
> How about "Volatile Tables" ?
>
> It makes it pretty clear that you cannot put valuable data in it.
> In the same time the word implies that the tables are gonna be faster
> than standard tables (like volatile memory being faster Disk storage)

Yeah, but volatile means « lost on shutdown », which is not the case
here during a clean shutdown.

> Plus it's easy to translate in French :P

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rob Wultsch 2011-05-05 15:36:33 Re: Unlogged vs. In-Memory
Previous Message damien clochard 2011-05-05 12:29:45 Re: Unlogged vs. In-Memory

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2011-05-05 14:25:29 Re: VARIANT / ANYTYPE datatype
Previous Message damien clochard 2011-05-05 12:29:45 Re: Unlogged vs. In-Memory