Re: beta testing version
Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com>
From: Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2000-12-01T19:15:36Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
At 11:02 AM 12/1/00 -0800, Nathan Myers wrote: >On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 06:39:57AM -0800, Don Baccus wrote: >> >> Probably the best answer to the "what does WAL get us, if it doesn't >> get us full recoverability" questions is to simply say "it's a >> prerequisite to getting full recoverability, PG 7.1 sets the foundation >> and later work will get us there". > >Not to quibble, but for most of us, the answer to Don's question is: >"It gives a ~20x speedup over 7.0." That's pretty valuable to some of us. >If it turns out to be useful for other stuff, that's gravy. Oh, but given that power failures eat disks anyway, you can just run PG 7.0 with -F and be just as fast as PG 7.1, eh? With no theoretical loss in safety? Where's your faith in all that doom and gloom you've been spreading? :) :) You're right, of course, we'll get roughly -F performance while maintaining a much more comfortable level of risk than you get with -F. - Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza@pacifier.com> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.