Simon Riggs wrote:
> If my assumption is badly wrong on that then perhaps HOT would not be
> useful after all. If we find that the majority of UPDATEs meet the HOT
> pre-conditions, then I would continue to advocate it.
This is exactly my situation. All updated hit non-indexed fields, with a
lot of lookups on indexes
What's interesting for me is that I might want to move away from some
heavy INSERT/DELETE cases to simply marking records as deleted on the
application side with this. The benefit being that I retain the archive
of "processed" items without having to move them, but get the advantage
of good throughput for the smaller set of items being "worked on".
Will be interesting to see how the design pans out.
- August
