On 6/15/21 8:04 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> Yeah, WAL-logging the contents of the source database would certainly
> be less weird than the current system. As Julien also pointed out, the
> question is, are there people using on "CREATE DATABASE foo TEMPLATE
> bar" to copy a large source database, on the premise that it's fast
> because it skips WAL-logging?
I'm 100% certain there are. It's not even a niche case.
>
> In principle, we could have both mechanisms, and use the new
> WAL-logged system if the database is small, and the old system with
> checkpoints if it's large. But I don't like idea of having to maintain
> both.
>
>
Rather than use size, I'd be inclined to say use this if the source
database is marked as a template, and use the copydir approach for
anything that isn't.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
