Re: WAL logging of SELECT ... INTO command - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: WAL logging of SELECT ... INTO command
Date
Msg-id 16480.1143039965@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WAL logging of SELECT ... INTO command  ("Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>)
Responses Re: WAL logging of SELECT ... INTO command
List pgsql-performance
"Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com> writes:
>> PITR wants all changes. Without PITR we can optimise certain logging
>> actions.

> The only change here is that we're creating a new table based on the
> results of a SELECT. If that SELECT doesn't use anything that's
> non-deterministic, then the machine doing the recovery should already
> have all the data it needs, provided that we log the SELECT that was
> used in the CTAS.

This is based on a fundamental misconception about the way PITR
log-shipping works.  We log actions at the physical level (put this
tuple here), not the logical here's-the-statement-we-executed level.
The two approaches cannot mix, because as soon as there's any physical
discrepancy at all, physical-level actions would be incorrectly applied
to the slave database.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Migration study, step 1: bulk write performanceoptimization
Next
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL logging of SELECT ... INTO command