Re: unlogged tables vs. GIST
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-12-17T20:03:34Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
The GiST scan algorithm uses LSNs to detect concurrent pages splits, but
- 2edc5cd493ce 9.1.0 cited
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes: > On 17.12.2010 21:32, Robert Haas wrote: >> I guess the question is whether it's right to conflate "table is >> unlogged" with "LSN is fake". It's not immediately obvious to me that >> those concepts are isomorphic, although though the reverse isn't >> obvious to me either. > The buffer manager only needs to know if it has to flush the WAL before > writing the page to disk. The flag just means that the buffer manager > never needs to do that for this buffer. You're still free to store a > real LSN there if you want to, it just won't cause any WAL flushes. Yeah. I think that BM_UNLOGGED might be a poor choice for the flag name, just because it overstates what the bufmgr needs to assume. It might be better to reverse the flag sense, and have a new flag that *is* set if the page contains an LSN that we have to check against WAL. regards, tom lane