Re: NOLOGGING option, or ? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Date
Msg-id 200506011412.j51ECIT20344@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> > Sorry to followup to my own message, but it occurs to me that COPY could be
> > made to automatically do this for the case of an empty destination table too.
> 
> Not unless you are proposing to change COPY to acquire a lock strong
> enough to lock out other writers to the table for the duration ...

Well, if the table is initally empty, what harm is there in locking the
table?  How many people query the table while it is being loaded, and
because the transaction isn't committed, the table is empty to everyone
else anyway.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Cost of XLogInsert CRC calculations
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Quick-and-dirty compression for WAL backup blocks