Re: GSoC proposal - "make an unlogged table logged"

On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello <
fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
> > <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> > >> I think this isn't a good design. Per the discussion between Andres
> > >> and I, I think that I think you should do is make ALTER TABLE .. SET
> > >> LOGGED work just like VACUUM FULL, with the exception that it will
set
> > >> a different relpersistence for the new relfilenode. If you do it
that
> > >> way, this will be less efficient, but much simpler, and you might
> > >> actually finish it in one summer.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Do it like 'VACUUM FULL' for any wal_level?
> >
> > Yep. Anything else appears to be a research problem.
> >
>
> I'll change the proposal. Thanks a lot!
>

One last question.

Do you think is difficult to implement "ALTER TABLE ... SET UNLOGGED" too?
Thinking in a scope of one GSoC, of course.

Regards,

--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
>> Timbira: http://www.timbira.com.br
>> Blog sobre TI: http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com
>> Perfil Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello