2010/6/23 Bruce Momjian <bruce@xxxxxxxxxx>: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > Josh Berkus <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> a) Eliminate WAL logging entirely > > If we elimiate WAL logging, that means a reinstall is required for even > a postmaster crash, which is a new non-durable behavior. > > Also, we just added wal_level = minimal, which might end up being a poor > name choice of we want wal_level = off in PG 9.1. Perhaps we should > have used wal_level = crash_safe in 9.0. > > I have added the following TODO: > > Consider a non-crash-safe wal_level that eliminates WAL activity > > * http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2010-06/msg00300.php > > -- isn't fsync to off enought? Regards Pavel > Bruce Momjian <bruce@xxxxxxxxxx> http://momjian.us > EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com > > + None of us is going to be here forever. + > > -- > Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance > -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
