Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 201B71337B4E for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:27:50 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 51937-06 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 19:27:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from marajade.localdomain (vcs5.camavision.com [63.228.164.252]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C981337990 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:27:41 -0400 (AST) Received: from [192.168.10.84] (unknown [192.168.10.84]) (Authenticated sender: andy) by marajade.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 68E484A2F8; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:27:39 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <4CE189AF.6020308@squeakycode.net> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:27:43 -0600 From: Andy Colson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Haas CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences References: <87hbfwvupx.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201011/247 X-Sequence-Number: 41271 On 11/15/2010 9:06 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > In 9.1, I'm hopeful that we'll have unlogged tables, which will even > better than turning these parameters off, and for which I just posted > a patch to -hackers. Instead of generating WAL and writing WAL to the > OS and then NOT trying to make sure it hits the disk, we just won't > generate it in the first place. But if PostgreSQL or the machine it's > running on crashes, you won't need to completely blow away the cluster > and start over; instead, the particular tables that you chose to > create as unlogged will be truncated, and the rest of your data, > including the system catalogs, will still be intact. > if I am reading this right means: we can run our db safely (with fsync and full_page_writes enabled) except for tables of our choosing? If so, I am very +1 for this! -Andy