From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Jim C. Nasby <jnasby@pervasive.com>
Cc: Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>
Cc: PFC <lists@peufeu.com>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 18:08:36 -0400
Message-ID: <4335.1147385316@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060511210141.GP99570@pervasive.com>
References: <E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA57901053F20@m0143.s-mxs.net>
<20060511210141.GP99570@pervasive.com>
"Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com> writes:
> I'd hope that wasn't what's happening... is the backend smart enough to
> know not to fsync anything involved with the temp table?
The catalog entries required for it have to be fsync'd, unless you enjoy
putting your entire database at risk (a bad block in pg_class, say,
would probably take out more than one table).
It's interesting to speculate about keeping such catalog entries in
child tables of pg_class etc that are themselves temp tables. Resolving
the apparent circularity of this is left as an exercise for the reader.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, jnasby@pervasive.com, ZeugswetterA@spardat.at, lists@peufeu.com, gsstark@mit.edu, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal
In-Reply-To: <4335.1147385316@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox