On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 16:41 -0200, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> > As discussed on -hackers, its possible to avoid writing any WAL at all
> > for COPY in these circumstances:
> >
> Cool.
>
> > The enclosed patch implements this, as discussed. There is no user
> > interface to enable/disable, just as with CTAS and CREATE INDEX; no
> > docs, just code comments.
> >
> IMHO, this deserves an GUC parameter (use_wal_in_copy?). Because a lot
> of people use COPY because it's faster than INSERT but expects that it
> will be in WAL. The default would be use_wal_in_copy = true.

That I don't think makes sense. A copy is an all or nothing option, if a
copy fails in the middle the whole thing is rolled back.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


>
>
--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate




---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match