| From: | Matthew <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Benchmark Data requested |
| Date: | 2008-02-05 15:25:52 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.64.0802051523470.20402@aragorn.flymine.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> In the case of a bulk upload to an empty table (or partition?) could you
>> not optimise the WAL away? That is, shouldn't the WAL basically be a
>> simple transformation of the on-disk blocks? You'd have to explicitly
>> sync the file(s) for the table/indexes of course, and you'd need some
>> work-around for WAL shipping, but it might be worth it for you chaps
>> with large imports.
>
> Only by locking the table, which serializes access, which then slows you
> down or at least restricts other options. Plus if you use pg_loader then
> you'll find only the first few rows optimized and all the rest not.
Why would you need to lock the table?
Matthew
--
Picard: I was just paid a visit from Q.
Riker: Q! Any idea what he's up to?
Picard: No. He said he wanted to be "nice" to me.
Riker: I'll alert the crew.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-02-05 15:26:47 | Re: Benchmark Data requested |
| Previous Message | Viviane Lestic | 2008-02-05 15:08:36 | Re: Performance issue using Tsearch2 |