Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: DELETE with LIMIT (or my first hack)

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Daniel Loureiro <loureirorg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Csaba Nagy <ncslists(at)googlemail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: DELETE with LIMIT (or my first hack)
Date: 2010-12-01 01:57:56
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Daniel Loureiro wrote:
> > 3. This doesn't work tremendously well for inheritance trees, where
> > ModifyTable acts as sort of an implicit Append node.  You can't just
> > funnel all the tuples through one Sort or Limit node because they aren't
> > all the same rowtype.  (Limit might perhaps not care, but Sort will.)
> > But you can't have a separate Sort/Limit for each table either, because
> > that would give the wrong behavior.  Another problem with funneling all
> > the rows through one Sort/Limit is that ModifyTable did need to know
> > which table each row came from, so it can apply the modify to the right
> > table.
> So I guess that I have choose the wrong hack to start.
> Just for curiosity, why the result of "WHERE" filter (in
> SELECT/DELETE/UPDATE) is not put in memory, i.e. an array of ctid, like an
> buffer and then executed by SELECT/DELETE/UPDATE at once ?

Informix dbaccess would prompt a user for confirmation if it saw a

  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2010-12-01 02:03:26
Subject: Re: Where are we on Standby Promotion?
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2010-12-01 01:35:56
Subject: Re: crash-safe visibility map, take three

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group