On 11/19/21 12:57, Marcos Pegoraro wrote: > > I get the idea of letting the server centralize logic like this - > but frankly if the application is choosing to send all that data > across the wire just to have the server throw it away the > application is wasting network I/O. If it does manage its > resources carefully then the server will never even see an update > and its behavior here becomes moot. > > I understand your point, it´s responsability of application to do what > it has to do. But lots of times (maybe 98% of them) is not same people > doing server side and application side. So, Postgres guys will have to > review all code being done on apps ? > > And ok, thanks for explaining me.
suppress_redundant_updates_trigger was created precisely because it's not always easy to create application code in such a way that it generates no redundant updates. However, there is a cost to using it, and the break even point can be surprisingly high. It should therefore be used with caution, and after appropriate benchmarks. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
