> Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> > and i'm sure no one is against that idea, but you're never going to be
> > able to match the performance of just avoiding the check.
>
> We'll never be able to match the performance of not having transactions,
> either, but the community has never for a moment considered having a
> "no transactions" mode.
>
it's unclear what a "no transaction" mode would mean, but I'd be willing to
guess some people have consider aspects of it (we've just never had
agreement)
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
No comments:
Post a Comment