WAL

From: Torsten Förtsch <tfoertsch123(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: WAL
Date: 2016-12-12 08:53:08
Message-ID: CAKkG4_nthwDp+uyJJx_dbGXc7dV5TuR8p-Ff3rV62O2-FJ89Lg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Hi,

if I do something like this:

BEGIN;
UPDATE tbl SET data='something' WHERE pkey='selector';
UPDATE tbl SET data=NULL WHERE pkey='selector';
COMMIT;

Given 'selector' actually exists, I get a separate WAL entry for each of
the updates. My question is, does the first update actually hit the data
file?

If I am only interested in the first update hitting the WAL, does it make
sense to do something like the above in a transaction? Would that help to
keep the table small in a high concurrency situation? The table itself has
a small fillfactor. So, in most cases there should be enough space to do a
HOT update. For that HOT update, is that second update setting data to NULL
beneficial or rather adverse?

Thanks,
Torsten

Responses

  • Re: WAL at 2016-12-12 11:37:33 from Albe Laurenz

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message t.dalpozzo@gmail.com 2016-12-12 09:07:35 Re: huge table occupation after updates
Previous Message Chris Withers 2016-12-12 07:34:46 Re: btree gist indices, null and open-ended tsranges