| From: | Thomas Vatter <thomas(dot)vatter(at)network-inventory(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>, Tino Wildenhain <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: in memory views |
| Date: | 2006-05-10 23:08:00 |
| Message-ID: | 44627250.5010908@network-inventory.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Kris Jurka wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 10 May 2006, Thomas Vatter wrote:
>
>> Yes, the difference between psql command line and application is 6
>> seconds to 40 seconds. It is exactly the step resultSet =
>> excecuteQuery() that needs 40 seconds. I use next() as a cursor
>> through the resultSet, but I fear this is not enough, do I have to
>> use createStatement(resultSetType, resultSetConcurrency) respectively
>> prepareStatement (resultSetType, resultSetConcurrency) to achieve the
>> cursor behaviour?
>
>
> http://jdbc.postgresql.org/documentation/81/query.html#query-with-cursor
>
> Kris Jurka
I was just returning to my mailbox to report success, I was just a bit
faster than your e-mail, I have found the fetchSize function, it
reduces the delay to 6 seconds. thanks a lot to all who helped, this was
really great support, I am glad that the problem is solved
tom
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Brian Wipf | 2006-05-10 23:56:18 | Re: Same query - Slow in production |
| Previous Message | Brian Wipf | 2006-05-10 22:39:14 | Same query - Slow in production |