Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-26 Thread Vik Reykja
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:19 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I've marked this patch committed, although in the end there was nothing left of it ;-) Thank you, Dean and Tom! I'm sorry for not participating in this thread, I've been away for the past five weeks and have much catching up

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-19 Thread Tom Lane
Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com writes: On 12 February 2012 02:06, Vik Reykja vikrey...@gmail.com wrote: I decided to take a crack at the todo item created from the following post: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2005-10/msg00458.php Here's my review of this patch.

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-18 Thread Dean Rasheed
On 17 June 2012 18:30, Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote: Gurjeet Singh  wrote: Dean Rasheed wrote: in HEAD: ... (actual time=1390.037..1390.037 rows=0 loops=1) Trigger for constraint fk_table_e_fkey: time=210.184 calls=9 Total runtime: 1607.626 ms With this patch: ...

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-18 Thread Dean Rasheed
On 17 June 2012 18:48, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com writes: On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.comwrote: I find it interesting that 'actual time' for top level 'Update on fk_table' is always higher in patched

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-18 Thread Tom Lane
Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com writes: I think that the patch already covers the most common use case (in my experience) but we may as well get as much out of it as we can while we're here. Yeah. The cases involving nulls are probably really rather unlikely altogether, but it seems a

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-17 Thread Gurjeet Singh
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.comwrote: Then in HEAD: EXPLAIN ANALYSE UPDATE fk_table SET b=b+1, c=c+1, d=d+1; QUERY PLAN

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-17 Thread Kevin Grittner
Gurjeet Singh wrote: Dean Rasheed wrote: in HEAD: ... (actual time=1390.037..1390.037 rows=0 loops=1) Trigger for constraint fk_table_e_fkey: time=210.184 calls=9 Total runtime: 1607.626 ms With this patch: ... (actual time=1489.640..1489.640 rows=0 loops=1) [no triggers fired]

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-17 Thread Tom Lane
Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com writes: On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.comwrote: I find it interesting that 'actual time' for top level 'Update on fk_table' is always higher in patched versions, and yet the 'Total runtime' is lower for the patched

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-17 Thread Tom Lane
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes: I figured that the trigger time was counted separately. Yeah, it is. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

[HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-16 Thread Dean Rasheed
On 12 February 2012 02:06, Vik Reykja vikrey...@gmail.com wrote: I decided to take a crack at the todo item created from the following post: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2005-10/msg00458.php The attached patch makes the desired changes in both code and function naming.

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-16 Thread Tom Lane
Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com writes: BTW, I had no problems applying both the original patch and Chetan Suttraway's version. The only difference between the patches seems to be that the original is in context format, and Chetan Suttraway's is in unified format. Which format do

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Optimize referential integrity checks (todo item)

2012-06-16 Thread Dean Rasheed
On 16 June 2012 18:04, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com writes: BTW, I had no problems applying both the original patch and Chetan Suttraway's version. The only difference between the patches seems to be that the original is in context format, and Chetan