| From: | "Joel Jacobson" <joel(at)compiler(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Laurenz Albe" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, "Corey Huinker" <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "vignesh C" <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, "Marko Tiikkaja" <marko(at)joh(dot)to> |
| Subject: | Re: Document efficient self-joins / UPDATE LIMIT techniques. |
| Date: | 2024-02-13 16:51:20 |
| Message-ID: | 9c6da1fc-4d2f-4445-b40f-64967dfd46a7@app.fastmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 13, 2024, at 10:28, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-02-12 at 12:24 -0500, Corey Huinker wrote:
>> > Do you plan to add it to the commitfest? If yes, I'd set it "ready for committer".
>>
>> Commitfest entry reanimated.
>
> Truly... you created a revenant in the already closed commitfest.
>
> I closed that again and added a new entry in the open commitfest.
>
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
This thread reminded me of the old discussion "LIMIT for UPDATE and DELETE" from 2014 [1].
Back in 2014, it was considered a "fringe feature" by some. It is thought to be more commonplace today?
/Joel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2024-02-13 17:17:06 | Re: Improve WALRead() to suck data directly from WAL buffers when possible |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-02-13 16:37:11 | Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2 |