Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Dimitri Fontaine
Subject Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache
Date
Msg-id 87sk4cu9ak.fsf@hi-media-techno.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-performance
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> The problem with a system-wide no-WAL setting is it means you can't
> trust the system catalogs after a crash.  Which means you are forced to
> use initdb to recover from any crash, in return for not a lot of savings
> (for typical usages where there's not really much churn in the
> catalogs).

What about having a "catalog only" WAL setting, userset ?

I'm not yet clear on the point but it well seems that the per
transaction WAL setting is impossible because of catalogs (meaning
mainly DDL support), but I can see us enforcing durability and crash
safety there.

That would probably mean that setting WAL level this low yet doing any
kind of DDL would need to be either an ERROR, or better yet, a WARNING
telling that the WAL level can not be that low so has been raised by the
system.

Regards,
--
dim

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache
Next
From: Rob Wultsch
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache