Re: PL/pgSQL 2
От | Jan Wieck |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PL/pgSQL 2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5406354E.5050208@wi3ck.info обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PL/pgSQL 2 (Joel Jacobson <joel@trustly.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/02/2014 12:20 PM, Joel Jacobson wrote: > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com> wrote: >> Joel Jacobson <joel@trustly.com> wrote: >> >>> Sorry for being unclear, I didn't mean to suggest the main concern is >>> updating *all* rows. >>> The main concern is when you have a rather complex UPDATE WHERE clause, >>> aiming to update exactly one row. Some of the expressions might be >>> assertions, to just double-verify the values and to make it stand-out >>> you are checking those expressions. >> >> >> These are two different problems which probably need two different >> solutions. Making the default behavior of a set-based command that >> it throw an error if the resulting set is not exactly one row >> doesn't seem like the right solution to either one of them. > > I see your point. > Basically, we have two types of applications where PL/pgSQL is commonly used. > a) OLTP applications where you typically operate on one row for each > UPDATE command. Your idea of what an OLTP application is seems flawed. > b) Data warehouseing applications where you process multiple rows in > each UPDATE command. Ditto. Regards, Jan -- Jan Wieck Senior Software Engineer http://slony.info
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: