On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Leonardo Francalanci <m_li...@yahoo.it> wrote: > The only data we can't rebuild it's the heap. So what about an option for > UNlogged indexes on a LOGged table? It would always preserve data, and it > would 'only' cost a rebuilding of the indexes in case of an unclean shutdown. > I think it would give a boost in performance for all those cases where the IO > (especially random IO) is caused by the indexes, and it doesn't look too > complicated (but maybe I'm missing something).
+1. > I proposed the unlogged to logged patch (BTW has anyone given a look at it?) > because we partition data based on a timestamp, and we can risk loosing the > last N minutes of data, but after N minutes we want to know data will always > be there, so we would like to set a partition table to 'logged'. That approach is something I had also given some thought to, and I'm glad to hear that people are thinking about doing it in the real world. I'm planning to look at your patch, but I haven't gotten to it yet, because I'm giving priority to anything that must be done to get 9.1beta1 out the door. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
