David G Johnston wrote > Well, that is half right anyway. UNLOGGED tables obey checkpoints just > like any other table. The missing feature is an option to leaved restored > the last checkpoint. Instead, not knowing whether there were changes > since the last checkpoint, the system truncated the relation. > > What use case is there for a behavior that the last checkpoint data is > left on the relation upon restarting - not knowing whether it was possible > the other data could have been written subsequent? If is possible to restore the table at last checkpoint state that will be more than enough. I don't care about the changes since last checkpoint, I am willing to lose those changes. There are use cases where is acceptable to lose some data, for example in a cache system, it is not a big issue if we lose some cached data. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.nabble.com/unlogged-tables-tp4985453p5845650.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
