| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Chris St Denis <lists(at)on-track(dot)ca>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: tsvector_update_trigger performance? |
| Date: | 2009-06-24 20:03:21 |
| Message-ID: | 53BB722A-B50E-4831-9E6F-3CE15BEA9C30@hi-media.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi,
Le 24 juin 09 à 18:29, Alvaro Herrera a écrit :
> Oleg Bartunov wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Chris St Denis wrote:
>>
>>> Is tsvector_update_trigger() smart enough to not bother updating a
>>> tsvector if the text in that column has not changed?
>>
>> no, you should do check yourself. There are several examples in
>> mailing lists.
>
> Or you could try using the supress_redundant_updates_trigger()
> function
> that has been included in 8.4 (should be easy to backport)
http://cvs.pgfoundry.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/backports/min_update/
http://blog.tapoueh.org/projects.html#sec9
But it won't handle the case where some other random column has
changed, but the UPDATE is not affecting the text indexed...
--
dim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris St Denis | 2009-06-25 04:03:08 | Re: tsvector_update_trigger performance? |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2009-06-24 17:42:08 | Re: cluster index on a table |