On 12/15/17 23:50, Jeremy Finzel wrote: > The common ground is some column in some table needs to be bulk updated. > I may not be explaining well, but in our environment we have done > hundreds of these using a generic framework to build a backfill. So I’m > not sure what you are questioning about the need? We have had to build a > worker to accomplish this because it can’t be done as a sql script alone.
I'm trying to identify the independently useful pieces in your use case. A background worker to backfill large tables is a very specific use case. If instead we had a job/scheduler mechanism and a way to have server-side scripts that can control transactions, then that might satisfy your requirements as well (I'm not sure), but it would also potentially address many other uses. > I’m not sure what you mean by a stored procedure in the background. > Since it would not be a single transaction, it doesn’t fit as a stored > procedure at least in Postgres when a function is 1 transaction. In progress: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/16/1360/ -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
