On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Rob Wultsch wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> 3. With respect to unlogged tables, the major obstacle seems to be
>> figuring out a way for these to get automatically truncated at startup
>> time.
>
> (please forgive what is probably
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> 3. With respect to unlogged tables, the major obstacle seems to be
> figuring out a way for these to get automatically truncated at startup
> time.
>
(please forgive what is probably a stupid question)
By truncate do mean reduce the table to a
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 5:24 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> The LSNs on all pages in an unlogged relation should be zero, and
> XLogFlush() will do nothing. That's what we rely on at the moment for pages
> that are not WAL-logged for some reason, I don't think you need any extra
> flag for that.
On 13/09/10 05:49, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
3. With respect to unlogged tables, the major obstacle seems to be
figuring out a way for these to get automatically truncated at startup
time. As with temporary table cleanup in general, the problem here
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> 3. With respect to unlogged tables, the major obstacle seems to be
> figuring out a way for these to get automatically truncated at startup
> time. As with temporary table cleanup in general, the problem here is
> that you can't do the obvious
