| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "marcin mank" <marcin(dot)mank(at)gmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Kenneth Marshall" <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>, "Andy Colson" <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: unlogged tables |
| Date: | 2010-11-17 21:00:12 |
| Message-ID: | 4CE3EDFC0200002500037927@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> OK, so we're proposing a hierarchy like this.
>
> 1. PERMANENT (already exists).
> 2. UNLOGGED (what this patch currently implements).
> 3. UNSYNCED (future work).
> 4. GLOBAL TEMPORARY (future work).
> 5. LOCAL TEMPORARY (our current temp tables).
All of the above would have real uses in our shop.
> It's possible to imagine a few more stops on this hierarchy.
Some of these might be slightly preferred over the above in certain
circumstances, but that's getting down to fine tuning. I think the
five listed above are more important than the "speculative ones
mentioned.
> I don't particularly care for the name UNSYNCED
EVANESCENT?
> I'm starting not to like UNLOGGED much either
EPHEMERAL?
Actually, the UNSYNCED and UNLOGGED seem fairly clear....
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | A.M. | 2010-11-17 21:02:03 | Re: unlogged tables |
| Previous Message | Steve Crawford | 2010-11-17 20:59:18 | Re: unlogged tables |