Re: pg_affected Change Request

From: Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>
To: Jan <jan(at)fastpitchcentral(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_affected Change Request
Date: 2005-02-10 17:31:40
Message-ID: 20050210173140.GA71631@winnie.fuhr.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 05:56:33AM -0500, Jan wrote:
>
> I write a program that mines data from a small few websites. I revisit
> those websites on a daily basis. I find a matching key (actually two fields
> comprise my unique key) and with the data collected on this visit I attempt
> to UPDATE an existing record. I want to know whether I just changed the
> data or that the data collected is the same as on my last visit.
>
> I use PHP. If I check pg_affected_rows($result) I find one record is always
> "affected" even when no data has actually changed. Nothing has changed so
> the rows affected should be zero. The "affected" is actually "attempted".

PostgreSQL stores a new version of each row regardless of whether
the update changed any columns or not, so in that sense all of the
rows were "affected." Presumably there's a reason for doing this,
although at the moment I'm not remembering why.

The following is a bit ugly, but if you want to update only those
rows where a value has changed, then you could do something like
this:

UPDATE tablename SET col1 = <col1value>, col2 = <col2value>, ...
WHERE keycol = <keyvalue>
AND (col1 IS DISTINCT FROM <col1value> OR
col2 IS DISTINCT FROM <col2value> ...)

This statement uses IS DISTINCT FROM instead of <> so the comparisons
will handle NULLs properly. If the columns are all NOT NULL then
you could use <>.

--
Michael Fuhr
http://www.fuhr.org/~mfuhr/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Uwe C. Schroeder 2005-02-10 17:41:49 Re: no self-joins in views?
Previous Message Christoph Pingel 2005-02-10 17:20:50 Re: no self-joins in views?