Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 6/23/06, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What I see in this discussion is a huge amount of "the grass must be
> > greener on the other side" syndrome, and hardly any recognition that
> > every technique has its downsides and complications.
> I'm being totally objective.  I don't think we should abandon
> PostgreSQL's overall design at all, because we do perform INSERTs and
> DELETEs much better than most systems.  However, I've looked at many
> systems and how they implement UPDATE so that it is a scalable
> operation.  Sure, there are costs and benefits to each implementation,
> but I think we have some pretty brilliant people in this community and
> can come up with an elegant design for scalable UPDATEs.

I think the UPDATE case is similar to the bitmap index scan or perhaps
bitmap indexes on disk --- there are cases we know can not be handled
well by our existing code, so we have added (or might add) these
features to try to address those difficult cases.

  Bruce Momjian   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Reply via email to