On Sat, 2005-12-24 at 10:32 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > An ALTER TABLE SET LOGGED/UNLOGGED switch might have some merit, but > please don't muddy the waters by confusing this with temp-table > status.
I would not be against such a table-level switch, but the exact behaviour would need to be specified more closely before this became a TODO item, IMHO. If someone has a 100 GB table, they would not appreciate the table being truncated if a transaction to load 1 GB of data aborts, forcing recovery of the 100 GB table. Best Regards, Simon Riggs ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
