[JDBC] Efficient use of ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with the PostgreSQL JDBC driver
От | Christopher BROWN |
---|---|
Тема | [JDBC] Efficient use of ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with the PostgreSQL JDBC driver |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHL_zcOaWb2wuTX0eVnVXie0LhDjdZgvX0xR1PZ1GX2sM-8Ovw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: [JDBC] Efficient use of ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with the PostgreSQLJDBC driver
[JDBC] Re: Efficient use of ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with the PostgreSQL JDBCdriver Re: [JDBC] Efficient use of ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with the PostgreSQLJDBC driver Re: [JDBC] Efficient use of ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with the PostgreSQLJDBC driver Re: Efficient use of ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with the PostgreSQLJDBC driver Re: Efficient use of ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with the PostgreSQL JDBCdriver Re: Efficient use of ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with the PostgreSQLJDBC driver Re: Efficient use of ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with the PostgreSQLJDBC driver |
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
Hello,
I've at last had an opportunity to use PostgreSQL 9.6 (instead of 9.4) for a project, and have been able to use the ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE clause. As it can involve repeating parameter values (including, as is my case, large binary files), I'm wondering if there's any performance or resource-usage side effects (or workarounds) when doing something like this:
INSERT INTO foo (c_uuid, file_data, file_name) VALUES (?, ?, ?)
ON CONFLICT (c_uuid) DO UPDATE SET file_data = ?, file_name = ?
On the Java side, that means invoking PreparedStatement::setBinaryStream TWICE for the same data.
I'm not noticing side effects on localhost (but haven't profiled either). Is this fine, or a potential problem? Is there a better approach?
Thanks,
Christopher
Christopher
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: