Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} 2.0

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Geoghegan
Тема Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} 2.0
Дата
Msg-id CAM3SWZS39XN09-RUHWDrnyv7-DT3-317+0Zma9HA1z0LX2NY=w@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} 2.0  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>)
Ответы Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} 2.0  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
> Are we OK with a 10% overhead, caused by the locking? That's probably
> acceptable if that's what it takes to get UPSERT. But it's not OK just to
> solve the deadlock issue with regular insertions into a table with exclusion
> constraints. Can we find a scheme to eliminate that overhead?

Looks like you tested a B-Tree index here. That doesn't seem
particularly representative of what you'd see with exclusion
constraints.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Greg Stark
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Providing catalog view to pg_hba.conf file - Patch submission
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: add modulo (%) operator to pgbench