Re: Thoughts on how to avoid a massive integer update.

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Fehrle, Brian" <bfehrle(at)comscore(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Thoughts on how to avoid a massive integer update.
Date: 2020-05-08 20:37:36
Message-ID: CAKFQuwYh5qfo752TxAu6SrwXB5zAd-N_p00CKJZ8+fKm0WsWAw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 12:49 PM Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Well as I said, I think you could add a column to info_table
>
> alter table info_table add orig_id int;
> update info_table set orig_id = info_table_sid;
>
> update info_table set info_table_sid = 456 where info_table_sid = 456;
>
>
huh?

alter table data_table *drop reference NOT SQL*
> alter table data_table *make reference to info_table.orig_id NOT SQL*
>
>
You don't seem to understand the requirement. The data_table integer value
must be changed - all you are doing is a convoluted column rename on the
table holding the PK half of the relationship.

David J.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rob Sargent 2020-05-08 20:41:34 Re: Thoughts on how to avoid a massive integer update.
Previous Message Adrian Klaver 2020-05-08 20:24:51 Re: pg_basebackup cannot compress to STDOUNT