| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, marcin mank <marcin(dot)mank(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: unlogged tables |
| Date: | 2010-11-17 20:48:52 |
| Message-ID: | 4CE43FB4.9070701@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/17/2010 03:37 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I don't particularly care for the name UNSYNCED, and I'm starting not
> to like UNLOGGED much either, although at least that one is an actual
> word. PERMANENT and the flavors of TEMPORARY are a reasonably
> comprehensible as a description of user-visible behavior, but UNLOGGED
> and UNSYNCED sounds a lot like they're discussing internal details
> that the user might not actually understand or care about. I don't
> have a better idea right off the top of my head, though.
Maybe VOLATILE for UNSYNCED? Not sure about UNLOGGED.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-11-17 20:51:37 | Re: unlogged tables |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-11-17 20:37:24 | Re: unlogged tables |