On 13 May 2011 21:56, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> It has bothered me that "unlogged tables" are explained using their
> implementation (logged), rather than their behavior (non-durable). How
> is "Non-Durabble Tables" for a name?
Unlogged tables still sounds fine to me. It's simple and accurate,
and it will be familiar to anyone who's disabled journalling on a
filesystem. (i.e. trading crash-safety for speed).
Non-durable just sounds like it'll eventually wear out like a cheap tyre.
--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
