From: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, Guillaume Cottenceau <gc(at)mnc(dot)ch>, Mario Splivalo <mario(dot)splivalo(at)megafon(dot)hr>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] Query much slower when run from postgres function |
Date: | 2009-03-09 19:56:53 |
Message-ID: | 491f66a50903091256n7fe4a3f6i93267d0d53b983cb@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc pgsql-performance |
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Unnamed prepared statements are planned after binding the values,
> > starting with 8.3, or more precisely starting with 8.3.2 as early 8.3
> > versions were partially broken on this behalf.
>
> No, 8.2 did it too (otherwise we wouldn't have considered 8.3.0 to be
> broken...). The thing I'm not too clear about is what "use of an
> unnamed statement" translates to for a JDBC user.
>
Tom,
The driver will use unnamed statements for all statements until it sees the
same statement N times where N is 5 I believe, after that it uses a named
statement.
Dave
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | James Mansion | 2009-03-09 20:35:14 | Re: [PERFORM] Query much slower when run from postgres function |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-03-09 19:51:58 | Re: Query much slower when run from postgres function |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | James Mansion | 2009-03-09 20:35:14 | Re: [PERFORM] Query much slower when run from postgres function |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-03-09 19:51:58 | Re: Query much slower when run from postgres function |