Re: update with no changes

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: update with no changes
Date: 2021-11-20 14:41:21
Message-ID: aa7e80d2-699c-e626-c96f-44781be1e01e@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 11/19/21 12:57, Marcos Pegoraro wrote:
>
> I get the idea of letting the server centralize logic like this -
> but frankly if the application is choosing to send all that data
> across the wire just to have the server throw it away the
> application is wasting network I/O.  If it does manage its
> resources carefully then the server will never even see an update
> and its behavior here becomes moot.
>
> I understand your point, it´s responsability of application to do what
> it has to do. But lots of times (maybe 98% of them) is not same people
> doing server side and application side. So, Postgres guys will have to
> review all code being done on apps ?
>
> And ok, thanks for explaining me.

suppress_redundant_updates_trigger was created precisely because it's
not always easy to create application code in such a way that it
generates no redundant updates. However, there is a cost to using it,
and the break even point can be surprisingly high. It should therefore
be used with caution, and after appropriate benchmarks.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marcos Pegoraro 2021-11-20 15:03:26 Re: update with no changes
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2021-11-20 14:13:11 rename SnapBuild* macros in slot.c