Re: allow LIMIT in UPDATE and DELETE

From: Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, Shelby Cain <alyandon(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Postgres general mailing list <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: allow LIMIT in UPDATE and DELETE
Date: 2006-05-24 10:30:31
Message-ID: 1148466631.3114.62.camel@coppola.muc.ecircle.de
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Wed, 2006-05-24 at 00:15, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 10:19:25AM +0200, Csaba Nagy wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2006-05-22 at 23:55, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > > > BTW, there's a bug/issue with CLUSTER that makes it not entirely
> > > > transaction safe.
> > >
> > > For God's sake, don't fix that one ! I rely on it... now seriously,
> > > until there's a way to tell the DB that an exclusive lock is enough to
> > > vacuum all dead rows, even if they would be visible by other
> > > transactions, CLUSTER is the only thing I can use to circumvent the long
> > > running transaction syndrome.
> >
> > I believe it's already fixed in HEAD/8.2.
>
> If it is, TODO doesn't reflect that:
>
> * Make CLUSTER preserve recently-dead tuples per MVCC
> requirements

Can I ask to leave in some kind of switch (configuration, syntax, I
don't care) so that the old behavior is still available if needed ?

Thanks,
Csaba.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kenneth Downs 2006-05-24 11:00:04 Re: challenging constraint situation - how do I make it
Previous Message Csaba Nagy 2006-05-24 10:29:12 Re: allow LIMIT in UPDATE and DELETE