Re: postgres 7.2 features.
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: Chris Bitmead <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au>
Cc: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>, pgsql-hackers@hub.org
Date: 2000-07-11T04:19:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > The bottom line is that the original postgres time-travel implementation > was totally cost-free. Actually it may have even speeded things > up since vacuum would have less work to do. Can you convince me that > triggers can compare anywhere near for performance? I can't see how. > All I'm asking is don't damage anything that is in postgres now that > is relevant to time-travel in your quest for WAL.... Basically, time travel was getting in the way of more requested features that had to be added. Keeping it around has a cost, and no one felt the cost was worth the benefit. You may disagree, but at the time, that was the consensus, and I assume it still is. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026