Re: [HACKERS] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE?

2006-01-03 Thread Simon Riggs
On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 12:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Currently, CTAS optimization requires a heap_sync during ExecEndPlan. It would be easy enough to extend this so that it also works for INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE. If you tried to do it that way you'd

[HACKERS] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE?

2005-12-22 Thread Simon Riggs
Having just optimized COPY to avoid writing WAL during the transaction in which a table was first created, it seems worth considering whether this should occur for INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE also. It is fairly common to do data transformation using INSERT SELECTs and UPDATEs. This is usually done

Re: [HACKERS] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE?

2005-12-22 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Currently, CTAS optimization requires a heap_sync during ExecEndPlan. It would be easy enough to extend this so that it also works for INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE. If you tried to do it that way you'd break the system completely. Not all updates go through

Re: [HACKERS] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE?

2005-12-22 Thread Simon Riggs
On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 12:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Currently, CTAS optimization requires a heap_sync during ExecEndPlan. It would be easy enough to extend this so that it also works for INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE. If you tried to do it that way you'd