Hi, Simon,
Simon Riggs wrote:
> 1. Provide a filter that can be easily used by archive_command to remove
> full page writes from WAL files. This would require us to disable the
> file size test when we begin recovery on a new WAL files, plus would
> need to redesign initial location of the checkp
On Sun, 2006-10-22 at 12:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> I think it is possible to detect this case without making catalog
> >> entries, so I'll give this a try. Methinks that the truncate *must* be
> >> the immediately preceding co
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>> I think it is possible to detect this case without making catalog
>> entries, so I'll give this a try. Methinks that the truncate *must* be
>> the immediately preceding command, otherwise we might have a trigger
>> executing to put
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 19:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Can you make the patch cover the case of
> >
> > begin;
> > truncate foo;
> > copy foo from ...
> > commit;
> >
> > It might be infeasible to detect this case, but if it's not ...
>
> I think it is possi
On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 19:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > But they can be re-created anew with the same name each time? Or I guess
> > not, but you redefine a view every 30 minutes to point to the latest
> > one?
>
> > If so, then I have a patch that will s
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But they can be re-created anew with the same name each time? Or I guess
> not, but you redefine a view every 30 minutes to point to the latest
> one?
> If so, then I have a patch that will speed up COPY when in the same
> transaction as the table that c
On Oct 21, 2006, at 4:40 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 15:17 -0400, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
On Oct 21, 2006, at 3:12 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 09:00 -0400, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
On Oct 21, 2006, at 6:08 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Sat, Oct 21
On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 15:17 -0400, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2006, at 3:12 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 09:00 -0400, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
> >> On Oct 21, 2006, at 6:08 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 10:37:51AM +0100, Simon
On Oct 21, 2006, at 3:12 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 09:00 -0400, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
On Oct 21, 2006, at 6:08 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 10:37:51AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
Turning off WAL is a difficult topic. Without it you have no cr
On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 09:00 -0400, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2006, at 6:08 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 10:37:51AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> Turning off WAL is a difficult topic. Without it you have no crash
> >> recovery, which IMHO everybody sa
On Oct 21, 2006, at 6:08 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 10:37:51AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
Turning off WAL is a difficult topic. Without it you have no crash
recovery, which IMHO everybody says they don't care about until they
crash, then they realise. It's hard to
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 10:37:51AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Turning off WAL is a difficult topic. Without it you have no crash
> recovery, which IMHO everybody says they don't care about until they
> crash, then they realise. It's hard to be selective about writing WAL
> for specific operations
On Fri, 2006-10-20 at 17:04 -0400, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
> On Oct 20, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> Is it possible to create tables in fashion that will not write info
> >> to the WAL log -- knowingly and intentionally making them
> >> unrecoverable? This is very desirable for us.
On Oct 20, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2006-10-20 at 13:18 -0400, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
Not sure who cares, so xzilla indicated I should drop a note here. I
just made the xlogdump stuff work for 8.1 (trivial) and fixed a few
other small issues that caused it to not work ri
On Fri, 2006-10-20 at 13:18 -0400, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
> Not sure who cares, so xzilla indicated I should drop a note here. I
> just made the xlogdump stuff work for 8.1 (trivial) and fixed a few
> other small issues that caused it to not work right both generally
> and in our environme
On Oct 20, 2006, at 1:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Theo Schlossnagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Is it possible to create tables in fashion that will not write info
to the WAL log -- knowingly and intentionally making them
unrecoverable?
Use temp tables?
temp tables won't work too well -- unless
Theo Schlossnagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it possible to create tables in fashion that will not write info
> to the WAL log -- knowingly and intentionally making them
> unrecoverable?
Use temp tables?
Also, it's likely that much of the WAL volume is full-page images.
While you can't
17 matches
Mail list logo
