On 11/19/21 12:57, Marcos Pegoraro wrote:
>
> I get the idea of letting the server centralize logic like this -
> but frankly if the application is choosing to send all that data
> across the wire just to have the server throw it away the
> application is wasting network I/O. If it does manage its
> resources carefully then the server will never even see an update
> and its behavior here becomes moot.
>
> I understand your point, it´s responsability of application to do what
> it has to do. But lots of times (maybe 98% of them) is not same people
> doing server side and application side. So, Postgres guys will have to
> review all code being done on apps ?
>
> And ok, thanks for explaining me.
suppress_redundant_updates_trigger was created precisely because it's
not always easy to create application code in such a way that it
generates no redundant updates. However, there is a cost to using it,
and the break even point can be surprisingly high. It should therefore
be used with caution, and after appropriate benchmarks.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
