Re: LIMIT for UPDATE and DELETE
От | Marko Tiikkaja |
---|---|
Тема | Re: LIMIT for UPDATE and DELETE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5410047D.8010109@joh.to обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: LIMIT for UPDATE and DELETE (Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: LIMIT for UPDATE and DELETE
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-09-10 04:25, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > (2014/09/09 18:57), Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> What's not clear to me is whether it make sense to do 1) without 2) ? Is >> UPDATE .. LIMIT without support for an ORDER BY useful enough? And if we >> apply this patch now, how much of it needs to be rewritten after 2) ? If >> the answers are "yes" and "not much", then we should review this patch >> now, and put 2) on the TODO list. Otherwise 2) should do done first. > > My answers are "yes" but "completely rewritten". Any particular reason for you to say that? Because an UPDATE might have a RETURNING clause, all the updated tuples have to go through the ModifyTable node one at a time. I don't see why we couldn't LIMIT there after implementing #2. .marko
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: