Tom Lane wrote: > Gene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> ... just my two cents. on a side note, would putting the wal on a >> tmpfs partition give you something similar? > > Indeed, I'm wondering why one needs to hack the Postgres core to throw > away data integrity guarantees; there are plenty of ways to do that > already :-(.
Under a Linux or FreeBSD environment sure... but what about where a good portion of the memory *is* flash? We have a customer right now where they have a device that has 64 megs of ram and 512 megs of flash. The system itself considers it total ram. They run over the 64 megs almost on boot. Allowing postgresql to be less aggressive on writes would help them quite a bit. > Hideyuki-san has not explained exactly what integrity > assumptions he wants to make or not make. I'm surely willing to listen > to supporting a different set of assumptions than we currently use, but > I'd like to see a clear explanation of what assumptions are being made > and why they represent a useful case. Absolutely agreed there. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at > > http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate > -- === 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 PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
