Thanks very much :-) this saves lot of time for my
update statements
-Venkatesh
--- Alban Hertroys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Venkatesh Babu wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I need to update few rows of a table (call it 't')
> and
> > need to
Hello,
I need to update few rows of a table (call it 't') and
need to set just one column col1 (out of around 100
columns... to be exact, our table has 116 columns).
The info about rows to be updated is present in
another table t2. t2 just contains 2 columns (row_key,
new value for col1).
What is
anyway, it just happened to me...
>
> do you use the WHERE clause in your UPDATE
> statement, and if so is the
> column you use to filter indexed?
>
> javier
>
>
> On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 03:14:52 -0800 (PST), Venkatesh
> Babu
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
ation having any effect on the
poor performance of updates (i mean to say is this
problem happening due to some improper migration???)
Thanks,
Venkatesh
--- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Venkatesh Babu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > There aren't any triggers but there are
Hi,
There aren't any foreign keys and we are currently
using Postgres version 7.4...
--- Venkatesh Babu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There aren't any triggers but there are 75262 update
> statements. The problem is that we have a datatype
> called as &
d present in it.
Thanks,
Venkatesh
--- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Venkatesh Babu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > We have a table cm_quotastates which has exactly
> > 4624564 rows and 25 columns and 9 indexes... Out
> of
> > these, our code retrieves 75
Hello,
We have a table cm_quotastates which has exactly
4624564 rows and 25 columns and 9 indexes... Out of
these, our code retrieves 75262 rows and modifies just
one column in each row... but updating these to
database is taking some significant time (around 20
minutes)... Tried the following wit
