Re: minimal update

From: Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: minimal update
Date: 2007-11-08 11:57:33
Message-ID: 381FC610-9CD2-4885-BE3A-66F4E5DA3744@seespotcode.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Nov 2, 2007, at 13:44 , Andrew Dunstan wrote:

> Ah. Good. Thanks, that's the piece I was missing.

What would be the disadvantages of always doing this, i.e., just
making this part of the normal update path in the backend? I'd think
it should save on unnecessarily dead tuples as well.

Michael Glaesemann
grzm seespotcode net

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zdenek Kotala 2007-11-08 12:34:35 Re: New tzdata available
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-11-08 11:19:55 Re: A small rant about coding style for backend functions