On 2014-04-01 13:37:57 -0300, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: > In the GSoC proposal page [1] I received some suggestions to strech goals: > > * "ALTER TABLE name SET UNLOGGED". This is essentially the reverse of the > core proposal, which is "ALTER TABLE name SET LOGGED". Yes, I think that > should definitely be included. It would be weird to have SET LOGGED but not > SET UNLOGGED.
Yes, that makes sense. > * Allow unlogged indexes on logged tables. I don't think it's realistic to build the infrastructure necessary for that as part of gsoc. The reasons have been explained somewhere in this thread. > * Implement "ALTER TABLE name SET LOGGED" without rewriting the whole > table, when wal_level = minimal. Yea, maybe. > * Allow unlogged materialized views. I don't think that's realistic either. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
