Alex Vinogradovs <AVinogradovs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > WAL segments already have their structure. Filesystem would be an > overhead, Just because you'd like that to be true doesn't make it true. We have to manage a variable number of active segments; track whether a given segment is waiting for future use, active, waiting to be archived, etc; manage status signaling to the archiver process; and so on. Now I'll freely admit that using a filesystem is only one of the ways that those problems could be attacked, but that's how they've been attacked in Postgres. If you want to not have that functionality present then you'd need to rewrite all that code and provide some other infrastructure for it to use. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
