On Wednesday September 22 2004 8:42, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2004 at 06:19:50PM -0600, Ed L. wrote:
> > Hmm.  Adding 2 inserts for every update/delete/insert done by our
> > applications would not be good for our performance.
>
> You misunderstand.  It's not 2 inserts.  It's one into one of the
> tables, depending on which is active.

The latest CVS code does 2 inserts by default.

2004-09-24 08:08:32.490 LOG:  statement: INSERT INTO bar (msg) VALUES ('Here we go');
2004-09-24 08:08:32.493 NOTICE:  bar INSERT Here we go
2004-09-24 08:08:32.494 LOG:  statement: INSERT INTO _replication.sl_log_1 (log_origin, log_xid, log_tableid, log_actionseq, log_cmdtype, log_cmddata) VALUES (1, $1, $2, nextval('_replication.sl_action_seq'), $3, $4);
2004-09-24 08:08:32.494 CONTEXT:  SQL query "INSERT INTO _replication.sl_log_1 (log_origin, log_xid, log_tableid, log_actionseq, log_cmdtype, log_cmddata) VALUES (1, $1, $2, nextval('_replication.sl_action_seq'), $3, $4);"
2004-09-24 08:08:32.495 LOG:  statement: INSERT INTO _replication.sl_log_2 (log_origin, log_xid, log_tableid, log_actionseq, log_cmdtype, log_cmddata) VALUES (1, $1, $2, nextval('_replication.sl_action_seq'), $3, $4);
2004-09-24 08:08:32.495 CONTEXT:  SQL query "INSERT INTO _replication.sl_log_2 (log_origin, log_xid, log_tableid, log_actionseq, log_cmdtype, log_cmddata) VALUES (1, $1, $2, nextval('_replication.sl_action_seq'), $3, $4);"

Ed