[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       pgsql-performance
Subject:    Re: [PERFORM] tsvector_update_trigger performance?
From:       Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine () hi-media ! com>
Date:       2009-06-25 6:55:40
Message-ID: 8CFF6A2F-7D5D-4C4C-9734-E85884E32000 () hi-media ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Also consider on update triggers that you could want to run anyway

--  
dim

Le 25 juin 2009 Ã  07:45, Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au> a  
écrit :

> On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 21:03 -0700, Chris St Denis wrote:
>> This sounds like something that should just be on by default, not a
>> trigger. Is there some reason it would waste the io of writing a  
>> new row
>> to disk if nothing has changed? or is it just considered too much
>> unnecessary overhead to compare them?
>
> I think the theory is that carefully written applications generally do
> not generate redundant updates in the first place. An application that
> avoids redundant updates should not have to pay the cost of redundant
> update detection and elimination.
>
> -- 
> Craig Ringer
>

-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]