On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote: > I don't think most applications are like that. See Kevin's comments about > doing things in a set-oriented way instead of row-by-row. I know I've > changed several procedures from the row-oriented style, looping over rows > with a FOR loop, updating each one individually, to set-oriented style with > a single UPDATE for a bunch of rows. It makes for more concise code, and > performs better. I'm sure there are counter-examples, and I've also written > many UPDATE statements that are expected to update exactly one row, but I > find an ASSERT would be adequate for that.
I'm *not* doing FOR-loops with UPDATE of single rows. I typically have functions which have an input variable, which maps to a primary key in a table, and the UPDATE is made on that single row. This is a simplificaiton, but the main point is that the typical use case is *not* FOR-loops. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
