From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | jay <jackem(dot)mojx(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] 答复: [PERFORM] Postgresql update op is very very slow |
Date: | 2008-06-26 10:31:42 |
Message-ID: | 2e78013d0806260331u3a60bff4yda1fee42688eeea5@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
2008/6/26 jay <jackem(dot)mojx(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com>:
> If we can do commit very 1000 row per round, it may resolve the
> problem.
> But PG not support transaction within function yet?
>
Yeah, transaction control is not supported inside functions. There are
some hacks using dblink to do transactions inside functions. You may
want to check that out.
I had suggested another hack in the past for very simplistic updates,
when you are sure that the tuple length does not change between
updates and you are ready to handle half updated table if there is a
crash or failure in between. May be for your case, where you are
updating a single column of the entire table and setting it to some
default value for all the rows, it may work fine. But please be aware
of data consistency issues before you try that. And it must be once in
a lifetime kind of hack.
http://postgresql-in.blogspot.com/2008/04/postgresql-in-place-update.html
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-06-26 12:19:05 | Re: ??: Postgresql update op is very very slow |
Previous Message | jay | 2008-06-26 10:04:18 | 答复: [PERFORM] Postgresql update op is very very slow |