Andreas, I think UNLOGGED would be something different but I'm not totally clear. However, it seems to me that an unlogged table would simply disappear (be truncated) after a server crash. That means instead of maybe loosing a record or two that I could loose a ton or records. But maybe my understanding is off.
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Andreas Kretschmer < akretsch...@spamfence.net> wrote: > Robert DiFalco <robert.difa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I have several tables that I use for logging and real-time stats. These > are not > > critical and since they are a bottleneck I want transactions against > them to > > always be asynchronous. Is there a way to specify this at a table level > or do I > > have to make sure to call set synchronous_commit='off' every time I > insert or > > update to them? And presumably remember to turn it back on again for > safety. > > I think, you can use unlogged tables instead. > > > Andreas > -- > Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely > unintentional side effect. (Linus Torvalds) > "If I was god, I would recompile penguin with --enable-fly." (unknown) > Kaufbach, Saxony, Germany, Europe. N 51.05082°, E 13.56889° > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general >
