Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC

On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:01:38 +0200
Lukas Smith <smith(at)pooteeweet(dot)org> wrote:

> Jochem van Dieten wrote:
>
> > make the session handler smarter? And if you can't do that, put some
> > logic in the session table that turns an update without changes into a
> > no-op?
>
> err isnt that one the job of the database?

Seems like a lot of work to give the database for special cases. Not
only would it have to compare all fields, it would also have to check
for the behaviour of all rules, triggers and follow chains. Doing this
for each and every update seems like a loss to me.

Some things just make more sense in the framework of the business rules.

--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.