Re: Drastic performance loss in assert-enabled build in HEAD - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: Drastic performance loss in assert-enabled build in HEAD
Date
Msg-id 1365169245.79317.YahooMailNeo@web162901.mail.bf1.yahoo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Drastic performance loss in assert-enabled build in HEAD  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 12:28:01PM +0200, Nicolas Barbier wrote:

>> +1. Having unlogged matviews without having incremental updates
>> yet, isn't super useful anyway.
>
> I would have surmised the opposite

Hmm.  I was thinking about the fact that a full refresh can be
unlogged anyway, but that's only true if you're not using WAL for
replication.  If you need a matview on the master but not on the
replica(s), then there is still benefit to declaring it to be
unlogged in the absence of incremental maintenance.

--
Kevin Grittner
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kevin Grittner
Date:
Subject: Re: matview scannability rehash (was Re: Drastic performance loss in assert-enabled build in HEAD)
Next
From: Kevin Grittner
Date:
Subject: Re: matview scannability rehash (was Re: Drastic performance loss in assert-enabled build in HEAD)