From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Debraj Manna <subharaj(dot)manna(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Postgres Updating only changed columns against entire row |
Date: | 2022-07-29 12:26:44 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwbkiGUnX8RxQuQRwfYSGXBT5NuhJhsEwJDx3wZcG8_LMQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Thursday, July 28, 2022, Debraj Manna <subharaj(dot)manna(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> 1.
> update empl set status = 2 where (id = 2);
> 2. update empl set status = 2, name='tuk', address='ind',
> metadata='meta' where (id = 2);
>
> Can someone let me know if there are any advantages of doing #1 over #2
> assuming there are no other indices or triggers on the table? Which is
> generally preferred?
>
Neither…
You’d write: update empl set status = $1, name = $2, … where id = $N;
Then assign some variables in your code to $1, $2, etc…
By having a parameter for each field one query can deal with changes to any
of the data elements.
> Postgres Version - 10.17
>
That doesn’t seem relevant, this is a theory question.
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mladen Gogala | 2022-07-29 13:12:45 | Re: Oracle data to PG |
Previous Message | Holger Jakobs | 2022-07-29 10:38:47 | Re: pg 12 \if unwanted message |