| 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 18:18:58 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobkxvKwNrX=eRWN8D=r4K6SdhuRSMEFHG=PZY928pxbDw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 12:50 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 12:35:50PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > How about something like LOG_AS_CLONE? That makes it clear, I hope,
> > that we're logging it a different way, but that method of logging it
> > is different in each case. You'd still have to read the documentation
> > to find out what it really means, but at least it seems like it points
> > you more in the right direction. To me, anyway.
>
> I think CLONE would be confusing since we don't use that term often,
> maybe LOG_DB_COPY or LOG_FILE_COPY?
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?
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2022-02-11 18:21:43 | Re: support for MERGE |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2022-02-11 18:13:46 | Re: postgres_fdw: using TABLESAMPLE to collect remote sample |