| From: | Tim Uckun <timuckun(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Running update in chunks? |
| Date: | 2013-01-25 09:02:59 |
| Message-ID: | CAGuHJrPQMByo86ney5KbyiJ2RNyrvH_sGeXikP=-ZU23krPd1Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> I agree that seems like the most likely cause. Each update to the
> row holding the hstore column requires adding new index entries for
> all the hstore elements, and autovacuum will need to clean up the
> old ones in the background. The best solution would be to either
> normalize the data instead of using hstore, or move the hstore to a
> separate table which is referenced by some sort of ID from the
> frequently-updated table.
That's very interesting. I can certainly split up the table, no big
deal there. So would the index be redone even if I am not updating
the hstore field itself?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2013-01-25 09:23:07 | Re: Running update in chunks? |
| Previous Message | Tim Uckun | 2013-01-25 09:00:15 | Re: Running update in chunks? |