From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Robins Tharakan" <tharakan(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Performance Implications of Using Exceptions |
Date: | 2008-04-01 04:29:35 |
Message-ID: | 20193.1207024175@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
"Robins Tharakan" <tharakan(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Would it fine to consider that an UPDATE query that found no records to
> update is (performance wise) the same as a SELECT query with the same WHERE
> clause ?
> As in, does an UPDATE query perform additional overhead even before it finds
> the record to work on ?
The UPDATE would fire BEFORE STATEMENT and AFTER STATEMENT triggers, if
there are any. Also, it would take a slightly stronger lock on the
table, which might result in blocking either the UPDATE itself or some
concurrent query where a plain SELECT would not've.
There might be some other corner cases I've forgotten. But in the basic
case I think your assumption is correct.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-04-01 05:07:17 | Re: POSIX file updates |
Previous Message | Robins Tharakan | 2008-04-01 02:26:31 | Re: Performance Implications of Using Exceptions |