On 6/15/21 8:04 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > > Yeah, WAL-logging the contents of the source database would certainly > be less weird than the current system. As Julien also pointed out, the > question is, are there people using on "CREATE DATABASE foo TEMPLATE > bar" to copy a large source database, on the premise that it's fast > because it skips WAL-logging?
I'm 100% certain there are. It's not even a niche case. > > In principle, we could have both mechanisms, and use the new > WAL-logged system if the database is small, and the old system with > checkpoints if it's large. But I don't like idea of having to maintain > both. > > Rather than use size, I'd be inclined to say use this if the source database is marked as a template, and use the copydir approach for anything that isn't. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
