| From: | Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tim Vadnais <tvadnais(at)earthlink(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Update on tables when the row doesn't change |
| Date: | 2005-05-25 16:08:34 |
| Message-ID: | 1117037314.31821.328.camel@state.g2switchworks.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 10:41, Tim Vadnais wrote:
> >> Why does Postgres perform an update on the table even
> >> if no data changes?
> >> Can I circumvent this behaviour of Postgres?
> >>
> Hi All,
>
> Can someone please address this aspect of Sebastian's email? I, too, am
> interested in the response.
>
Actually, I believe it was addressed by Tom, when he said that it would
be more costly to check every single update to see if there WAS a change
before applying it than to just apply the changes every time.
I concur. Can you imagine slowing down ALL updates by 5% or something
like that just to prevent the rare case where an update didn't actually
change a value?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2005-05-25 16:16:14 | Re: Update on tables when the row doesn't change |
| Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2005-05-25 16:00:22 | Re: triggers/functions across databases |