From: | Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Row locking during UPDATE |
Date: | 2003-09-12 19:28:00 |
Message-ID: | 20030912192800.GJ26188@libertyrms.info |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 09:53:47AM -0400, David F. Skoll wrote:
> > Note that if you do
> > this very frequently, and you have also to select the summary data,
> > it won't work (as I have learned from painful experience) because
> > the holding table will gradually build up a lot of dead tuples.
>
> That doesn't seem to be a problem; after the summary, I do a
> VACUUM and the holding table seems to shrink down nicely.
You apparently don't have the contention that we did. Are your
transactions short? We had a problem with this sort of design, but I
think it was because we had some transactions which ran long and
depended on the summarised results. But if it works for you, great.
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ian Barwick | 2003-09-12 19:36:19 | Re: Casting varchar to bytea |
Previous Message | Terry Hampton | 2003-09-12 18:45:55 | Re: object creation date |