2008/6/26 Pavan Deolasee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 2008/6/26 jay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> If we can do commit very 1000 row per round, it may resolve the >> problem. >> But PG not support transaction within function yet? >> > > Yeah, transaction control is not supported inside functions. There are > some hacks using dblink to do transactions inside functions. You may > want to check that out.
If you need autonomous transactions. For most people save points and catching seem to be a n acceptable form of transaction control. > I had suggested another hack in the past for very simplistic updates, > when you are sure that the tuple length does not change between > updates and you are ready to handle half updated table if there is a > crash or failure in between. May be for your case, where you are > updating a single column of the entire table and setting it to some > default value for all the rows, it may work fine. But please be aware > of data consistency issues before you try that. And it must be once in > a lifetime kind of hack. > > http://postgresql-in.blogspot.com/2008/04/postgresql-in-place-update.html In a way that's what pg_bulkloader does. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
