On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 16:41 -0200, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: > > > As discussed on -hackers, its possible to avoid writing any WAL at all > > for COPY in these circumstances: > > > Cool. > > > The enclosed patch implements this, as discussed. There is no user > > interface to enable/disable, just as with CTAS and CREATE INDEX; no > > docs, just code comments. > > > IMHO, this deserves an GUC parameter (use_wal_in_copy?). Because a lot > of people use COPY because it's faster than INSERT but expects that it > will be in WAL. The default would be use_wal_in_copy = true.
That I don't think makes sense. A copy is an all or nothing option, if a copy fails in the middle the whole thing is rolled back. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match