Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1u6SOI-00G9Ae-Tp for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2025 10:59:15 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1u6SOG-00ANLM-A2 for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2025 10:59:13 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1u6SOF-00ANFq-TZ for pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2025 10:59:12 +0000 Received: from mail.hjp.at ([212.17.106.138] helo=rorschach.hjp.at) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1u6SOB-0013FZ-0e for pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2025 10:59:10 +0000 Received: by rorschach.hjp.at (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CBA5B194EF; Sun, 20 Apr 2025 12:59:06 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2025 12:59:06 +0200 From: "Peter J. Holzer" To: pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: Order of update Message-ID: <20250420105906.ya2safyc66vhi7j3@hjp.at> Mail-Followup-To: pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org References: <20250420091033.n437fdrkihtjrncd@hjp.at> <277c713f-452c-4449-9897-16a9738077eb@gelassene-pferde.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4cjngve4u467wqn4" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <277c713f-452c-4449-9897-16a9738077eb@gelassene-pferde.biz> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk --4cjngve4u467wqn4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2025-04-20 11:34:56 +0200, Thiemo Kellner wrote: > Very interesting. But is the sort overhead worth it? Why not make the > constraint deferrable before the update and switch back afterwards? Mostly idle curiosity whether that's possible at all. But there might be other reasons why you want to do updates in a predictable order. For example to prevent deadlocks. hjp --=20 _ | Peter J. Holzer | Story must make more sense than reality. |_|_) | | | | | hjp@hjp.at | -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing __/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | challenge!" --4cjngve4u467wqn4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEETtJbRjyPwVTYGJ5k8g5IURL+KF0FAmgE03QACgkQ8g5IURL+ KF2vXg/8D4py1p4HE2a+imAI1R4zj0s3yCgV+ot5O74UG1Y8NNvHYAT0HX6aA5fo ifEdtgcN9ff3U009ODosoADKSXtqswLlEgMTfKhlRhKQ2Jl6F+++gkLntMAKhsHb vAEkTTm7jY4UkhOdFeKZH/KRGvWTY4tj3biaao3iOYbHpJczVOtPWdyuZPHJsiVQ VAUQs40VPqY2C3bsXxuRCzQmZJasW7AwbrGNV3Ng/zSnjQuXwpqZgcg5zhAh3nJ4 MZ9ANvq14ep7CkJ62089WqJJx9DwyXYjHrpPZRxvEsl7vxJrM/Fo8sW+z63pxIjt 2PT/iDTTYyQFP0ptqqeO/nJ3tTbgHldICkAS1Fl54V5jkTLfb3Yvvp92Lc3v6Q9p 6EyIKFez93MSv+JIiZ0TWiCHmQGhY/nVWnitd10xU8UAp5DGuhGhuAVwHpOzr2Fq Ko3UXJrwwqA8WhVFh5xnn8XdbY7ZWGQjr8W2tYWDSV1i2+ilxKArZ1fClysd8P7d C2/26pxSvwjBbLGK4YN+gxTqFqqJfcq5blh0bcrN5vR3URgrnYjENANqZj4LB/F4 pha0ggnsRPxX2vi1unamsfX/c4hTMtJmGLWSaBpfdgYq0LKzxfhnNzjNKKCe+JJz NHaZ0LviQJ3iwVKoRrOCIVQyb5caoX8q/TzA7Kx2c3SW3Kp5OdY= =3K/j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4cjngve4u467wqn4--