Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Re: [PATCHES] Re: [INTERFACES] Patch for JDBC timestamp problems

From: Peter T Mount <peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: Joseph Shraibman <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net>
Cc: Michael Stephenson <mstephenson(at)tirin(dot)openworld(dot)co(dot)uk>, PostgreSQL jdbc list <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCHES] Re: [INTERFACES] Patch for JDBC timestamp problems
Date: 2001-01-30 13:43:04
Message-ID: 980862184.3a76c4e8bf0e6@webmail.retep.org.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-interfacespgsql-jdbcpgsql-patches
Quoting Joseph Shraibman <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net>:

> Michael Stephenson wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, Joseph Shraibman wrote:
> > 
> > > > What was the conclusion of this discussion?  Do we leave it
> static?
> > >
> > > No, it cannot be static.
> > 
> > As I see it we have three possible solutions to this problems.
> > 
> > a) Just stop it being static, each PreparedStatement gets a new
> >    instantiation (I think this is what we've done for now).
> > b) static ThreadLocal, each Thread gets one instantiation.
> 
> But I think some people are still using java 1.1.x and they don't have
> ThreadLocal.

True, except the 1.1 & 1.2 implementations are different packages, so you 
simply don't do ThreadLocal in 1.1.x

> > c) An Object Pool (possibly using SoftReferences to stop memory
> bloat),
> >    slightly more difficult to code, a lot less instantiations, much
> >    better performance.
> 
> But there are so many different ones used and you would have to make a
> pool for each one.
> 
> > 
> > If people agree that either 'b' or 'c' is a better solution, I'll go
> ahead
> > and implement it.
> 
> I don't agree.  Part of java performance is memory usage.  Introducing
> memory pools means keeping objects around forever even if they are used
> once.  In tests I've done to see if using static variables are usful
> with string parsing I've found that gain is minimal.  Any call to
> postgress will be disk and network bound and trying to introduce a pool
> will only complicate things.
> 
> -- 
> Joseph Shraibman
> jks(at)selectacast(dot)net
> Increase signal to noise ratio.  http://www.targabot.com
> 



-- 
Peter Mount peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk
PostgreSQL JDBC Driver: http://www.retep.org.uk/postgres/
RetepPDF PDF library for Java: http://www.retep.org.uk/pdf/

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-01-30 14:05:54
Subject: Re: Shared library support for postmaster
Previous:From: Erik HofmanDate: 2001-01-30 13:01:37
Subject: Shared library support for postmaster

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Luiz Fernando SodréDate: 2001-01-30 14:29:37
Subject: Compiling Perl code
Previous:From: Michael StephensonDate: 2001-01-30 09:39:13
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Re: [INTERFACES] Patch for JDBC timestamp problems

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2001-01-30 16:51:07
Subject: Re: [JDBC] Re: Postgresql and JDBC
Previous:From: Jean-Francois BurdetDate: 2001-01-30 11:14:18
Subject: Removing blob using pure JDBC (PG7.1)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group