Rob Nikander <rob.nikander@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Jun 10, 2017, at 10:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> […] but it'd be better to adjust the query to ensure a deterministic
>> update order.
> Thank you for the answer. Since `update` has no `order by` clause, I’m guessing there’s no way to do this with just
the`update` statement, and that I should use `select … order by … for update’ for this.
Yeah, that's one easy answer. You can probably force it with a sub-select
in the UPDATE, as well, but it will take more thought.
regards, tom lane