Hacker News Reader

> It implements row-level WAL (Write-Ahead Log) and a non-persistent undo log. This significantly reduces IO operations for write transactions.

What is the downside of doing this? I assume there is a tradeoff?

View on HN

Sure, there are downsides. 1. The replay of WAL records becomes somewhat more CPU-expensive. But at the same time, OrioleDB can do that in parallel. 2. Replace becomes not the file-level equivalent of primary. Thus, you, for instance, can't continue file-level incremental backup started taken from the primary with the replica. Nevertheless, I strongly believe that row-level WAL is a great win on average, and opens brilliant perspectives for further developments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com