| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Implement UNLOGGED clause for COPY FROM |
| Date: | 2020-07-09 12:20:21 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LJGB66WBPbPa=6ra0Tz=pp6ZjBeX6Go8C8mXLJp7DypA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 11:47 AM osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com
<osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> In terms of streaming replication,
> I'd like to ask for advice of other members in this community.
> Now, I think this feature requires to re-create standby
> immediately after the COPY UNLOGGED like Oracle's clause
>
This seems quite limiting to me and I think the same will be true for
subscribers that get data via logical replication, right? I suspect
that the user will perform such an operation from time-to-time and
each time creating replica again could be really time-consuming and
maybe more than it will save by making this operation unlogged.
I wonder do they really need to replicate such a table and its data
because each time creating a replica from scratch after an operation
on one table doesn't sound advisable to me?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andy Fan | 2020-07-09 12:20:41 | Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance |
| Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2020-07-09 12:19:06 | Re: Expand the use of check_canonical_path() for more GUCs |