| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Rukh Meski <rukh(dot)meski(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: LIMIT for UPDATE and DELETE |
| Date: | 2014-08-25 12:40:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KaZ2kzuDRzVWOeRzhfTkD261uLG7sFw_ceWmTkZZYbNQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
wrote:
> (2014/08/15 6:18), Rukh Meski wrote:
>>
>> Based on the feedback on my previous patch, I've separated only the
>> LIMIT part into its own feature. This version plays nicely with
>> inheritance. The intended use is splitting up big UPDATEs and DELETEs
>> into batches more easily and efficiently.
>
>
> Before looking into the patch, I'd like to know the use cases in more
details.
You can once check the previous commit fest thread [1] for
this feature, in that you can find some use cases and what are
the difficulties to implement this feature, it might aid you in
review of this feature.
[1]
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1412
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Albe Laurenz | 2014-08-25 12:58:59 | Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-08-25 12:29:49 | Re: Escaping from blocked send() reprised. |