How much concern is there for the contention for use cases where the WAL can't be bypassed?
Thanks, Alan
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes:
> The following copying 3M rows(each) into a seperate table of the same > database.
Is this with WAL, or bypassing WAL? Given what we've already seen, a lot of contention for WALInsertLock wouldn't surprise me much here. It should be possible to bypass that though.