On 30/11/2009 11:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Craig Ringer<cr...@postnewspapers.com.au> writes:
Just a side note: in addition to its use for partial replication, this
might have potential for performance-prioritizing databases or tablespaces.
Being able to separate WAL logging so that different DBs, tablespaces,
etc went to different sets of WAL logs would allow a DBA to give some
databases or tablespaces dedicated WAL logging space on faster storage.
I don't think this can possibly work without introducing data corruption
issues. What happens when a transaction touches tables in different
tablespaces? You can't apply the changes out-of-order.
Argh, good point, and one that should've been blindingly obvious.
At a database level something like that may still be handy, though I
haven't the foggiest how one would handle the shared system catalogs.
--
Craig Ringer
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
