Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints
Date: 2022-02-11 20:48:01
Message-ID: CA+TgmobaJQLgonwtLM=BdjX5KYf7qx=x-H0861KvONqtwyi71g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 1:32 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > Yeah, maybe. But it's not clear to me with that kind of naming whether
> > TRUE or FALSE would be the existing behavior? One version logs a
> > single record for the whole database, and the other logs a record per
> > database block. Neither version logs per file. LOG_COPIED_BLOCKS,
> > maybe?
>
> Yes, I like BLOCKS more than FILE.

Cool.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-02-11 20:55:42 Re: Fix overflow in DecodeInterval
Previous Message Robert Haas 2022-02-11 20:47:44 Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints