X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A62D9DC973 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:47:21 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 14523-02 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:47:23 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from mx2.surnet.cl (mx2.surnet.cl [216.155.73.181]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9290C9DC87D for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:47:17 -0400 (AST) Received: from unknown (HELO cluster.surnet.cl) ([216.155.73.165]) by mx2.surnet.cl with ESMTP; 24 Mar 2006 09:47:21 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.02,198,1139194800"; d="scan'208"; a="38461118:sNHT19519120" Received: from alvh.no-ip.org (201.221.200.224) by cluster.surnet.cl (7.0.043) (authenticated as alvherre@surnet.cl) id 43A978FD00BCFDBE; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:47:21 -0400 Received: by alvh.no-ip.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A7951C3A2D0; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:47:20 -0400 (CLT) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:47:20 -0400 From: Alvaro Herrera To: "Jim C. Nasby" Cc: Qingqing Zhou , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: WAL logging of SELECT ... INTO command Message-ID: <20060324134720.GA25359@surnet.cl> Mail-Followup-To: "Jim C. Nasby" , Qingqing Zhou , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org References: <20060321122211.GU15742@pervasive.com> <1142973230.24487.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060324100731.GO90527@pervasive.com> <20060324123902.GA14217@surnet.cl> <20060324130121.GE90527@pervasive.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060324130121.GE90527@pervasive.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.578 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.341, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE=0.479, DNS_FROM_RFC_POST=1.44] X-Spam-Score: 1.578 X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200603/495 X-Sequence-Number: 17932 Jim C. Nasby wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 08:39:02AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Jim C. Nasby wrote: > > > > > Why would the content of the old_table be unreliable? If we've replayed > > > logs up to the point of the CTAS then any data that would be visible to > > > the CTAS should be fine, no? > > > > > > Though, the way Tom put it in one of his replies it sounds like WAL > > > doesn't do any kind of statement logging, only data logging. If that's > > > the case I'm not sure that the CTAS would actually get replayed. But I > > > suspect I'm just misunderstanding... > > > > The CTAS doesn't get logged (nor replayed obviously). What happens is > > that the involved files are fsync'ed before transaction commit, AFAIR. > > Ahh, yes, that sounds right. Might be a nice gain to be had if there was > some way to log the statement, but I suspect getting WAL to support that > would be extremely non-trivial. None at all, at least in the current incarnation, I think, because said query execution is dependent on the contents of the FSM, which is itself dependent on the timing of VACUUM and other stuff. Such an action, running with a different FSM content, can very trivially cause data corruption. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.