Nicolas Barbier <> writes:
> 2010/8/25 Simon Riggs <>:
>> You're exactly correct and I now understand Markus' comment. Do you
>> think that exact meaning prevents my proposal from being useful?

> Not at all, because I guess that updates to non-UNIQUE columns are way
> more common that updates to UNIQUE columns.

In particular, HOT updates are known useful even though they have
that restriction and more.

It strikes me that a possibly useful simplification of the idea is a
lock type that allows HOT updates and not non-HOT ones; or more
precisely not ones that change any indexed columns --- if the row ends
up having to go off-page for lack of space, that need not concern us.

                        regards, tom lane

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to