Re: Acclerating INSERT/UPDATE using UPS - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
| From | Gene |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Acclerating INSERT/UPDATE using UPS |
| Date | |
| Msg-id | 430d92a20702102048s75b5b0f2tad38b2dc30a3bd70@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
| In response to | Re: Acclerating INSERT/UPDATE using UPS ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
| Responses |
Re: Acclerating INSERT/UPDATE using UPS
(Hideyuki Kawashima <kawasima@cs.tsukuba.ac.jp>)
Re: Acclerating INSERT/UPDATE using UPS (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| List | pgsql-hackers |
I think it would be great to have this kind of functionality built into postgres (optional and disabled by default of course) I use postgres mainly for its querying and concurrency features (a 10x increase in insert/update speed would be phenomenal) I know most people need 100% data integrity but as Hideyuki pointed out we all don't need 100%. On our project, when the power is out, we aren't receiving data anyways... just my two cents. on a side note, would putting the wal on a tmpfs partition give you something similar?
--
Gene Hart
cell: 443-604-2679
On 2/10/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
Hideyuki Kawashima wrote:
> Joshua,
:)
> The reason why I made the Sigres is, the advances of recent non volatile
> memories. Just now we do not usually use non volatile memories. But in
> the near future, situation would change. I think if a non volatile
> memories can be considered as a persistence device, PostgreSQL WAL
> mechanism should be modified.
> However, I do not use such devices usually. Thus I made Sigres which
> requires UPS.
This is actually very interesting. We ( www.commandprompt.com) have had
several customers ask us how we can make PostgreSQL more reasonable
within a flash environment.
I agree with you that in the future you will see many such databases
including PostgreSQL living on these devices.
Tom? What do you think? Is there some room for movement here within the
postgresql.conf to make something like sigres usable within PostgreSQL
proper?
>
> Currently I have just ignored XLogWrite and WALWriteLock, but a friend
> of mine (a Japanese great hacker of PostgreSQL) has more idea to improve
> WAL if a battery supplied memory can be considered as a persistent device.
>
We are coming up very quickly on a feature freeze for the next version
of PostgreSQL. If... we can has something out quickly enough and in a
thought out fashion, the hackers may be willing to accept a patch for
8.3.. If not there is always 8.4..
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
--
Gene Hart
cell: 443-604-2679
pgsql-hackers by date: