On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Curt Sampson wrote: > > Given the very low parsing and 'planning' overhead, the real cost would be > > WAL (the bootstrapper could fail and render the database unusable) and the > > subsequent updating of on-disk relations. > > MS SQL Server, when doing a BULK INSERT or BCP, can do it as a fully or > "minimally" logged operation. When minimally logged, there's no ability > to roll-forward or recover inserted data, just the ability to go back > to the state at the beginning of the operation. This technique can work > even though an on-line database. A bit more information is available at
The other reason I say that this bootstrap tool would still use WAL is that bypassing WAL would require writing a fairly significant amount of code (unless the pre-WAL heap_insert() code could be used, with relevant modification). On the other hand, I would imagine it to be very difficult to implement an 'interactive' roll back facility with the kind of tool I am describing. Gavin ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
