| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | J Chapman Flack <jflack(at)math(dot)purdue(dot)edu>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Artus de benque <artusdebenque(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Postgresql bug report - unexpected behavior of suppress_redundant_updates_trigger |
| Date: | 2017-06-19 21:10:47 |
| Message-ID: | 10492.1497906647@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... If the trigger is succeeding (ie,
>> detecting a no-op update) often enough that it would be worth that,
>> you've really got an application-stupidity problem to fix.
> ISTM the whole point of suppress_redundant_updates_trigger is to cope
> with application stupidity.
I think it's a suitable band-aid for limited amounts of stupidity.
But it eliminates only a small fraction of the total overhead involved
in a useless update command. So I remain of the opinion that if that's
happening a lot, you're better off fixing the problem somewhere upstream.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-06-19 21:19:22 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Postgresql bug report - unexpected behavior of suppress_redundant_updates_trigger |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2017-06-19 20:59:17 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Postgresql bug report - unexpected behavior of suppress_redundant_updates_trigger |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-06-19 21:19:22 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Postgresql bug report - unexpected behavior of suppress_redundant_updates_trigger |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-06-19 21:07:50 | Re: Rules on table partitions |