| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Franck Routier <franck(dot)routier(at)axege(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Deferred constraint and delete performance |
| Date: | 2010-02-10 17:36:23 |
| Message-ID: | 201002101836.25964.andres@anarazel.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wednesday 10 February 2010 15:56:40 Tom Lane wrote:
> Franck Routier <franck(dot)routier(at)axege(dot)com> writes:
> > I am wondering if deferring foreign key constraints (instead of
> > disableing them) would increase performance, compared to non deferred
> > constraints
>
> No, it wouldn't make any noticeable difference AFAICS. It would
> postpone the work from end-of-statement to end-of-transaction,
> but not make the work happen any more (or less) efficiently.
It could make a difference if the transaction is rather long and updates the
same row repeatedly because of better cache usage. But I admit thats a bit of
a constructed scenario (where one likely would get into trigger-queue size
problems as well)
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Carey | 2010-02-10 18:04:38 | Re: Linux I/O tuning: CFQ vs. deadline |
| Previous Message | Jeff | 2010-02-10 17:22:57 | Re: Linux I/O tuning: CFQ vs. deadline |