Re: Re: [WIP] Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Re: [WIP] Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation
Date
Msg-id 15929.1348721319@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [WIP] Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
Responses Re: Re: [WIP] Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> You cannot assume executor-unmodified columns are also unmodified from
> heap_update()'s perspective.  Expansion in one column may instigate TOAST
> compression of a logically-unmodified column, and that counts as a change for
> xlog delta purposes.

Um ... what about BEFORE triggers?

Frankly, I think that expecting the executor to tell you which columns
have been modified is a non-starter.  We have a solution for HOT and
it's silly to do the same thing differently just a few lines away.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Switching timeline over streaming replication
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [WIP] Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation