On Nov 17, 2010, at 4:00 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.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....
Unless one thinks that the types could be combined- perhaps a table declaration could use both UNLOGGED and UNSYNCED? Cheers, M -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
