On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> wrote:
>
>> I doubt that anyone wants the current behaviour.
>
> Current behavior would be an exact fit for a few use cases we have.
> Attempting to salvage some portion of the data on startup after a
> crash would yield it unusable for the uses I have in mind. It would
> have either all be there, or all gone.
>
> That's not to knock use cases others may have, just providing a data
> point.
Those words have been taken out of context, leading to what looks to
me like a confusion.
..by "the current behaviour", I was specifically talking about the
problem raised by Rob Wultsch upthread about RAM disks, not anything
else.
I have proposed a new and additional behaviour for 9.2 on hackers,
though the two points are unrelated except for its me making them
both.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
