| From: | Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: left join with smaller table or index on (XXX is not null) to avoid upsert |
| Date: | 2009-01-19 17:17:40 |
| Message-ID: | 34d269d40901190917g7a3a5db4t7f8c6ee53805a09@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 09:48, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> But having said that: 8.4 will provide a standard trigger that
>> short-circuits vacuous updates, which you can apply to tables in which
>> you think vacuous updates are likely. It's your responsibility to place
>> the trigger so that it doesn't interfere with any other trigger
>> processing you may have.
>
> Tom, Can you point us to
> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/ where it is described
> in more detail ?
I assume he is talking about suppress_redundant_updates_trigger, see
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/functions-trigger.html
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Browne | 2009-01-19 17:28:11 | Re: number of connections |
| Previous Message | Rubén F. | 2009-01-19 17:10:58 | number of connections |