Re: Input and Output data traffic

No I didn't. I'm using the "noob-approach", and using all default, no
special optimization, because normally that's what the people around here
do. :)

For ruby, python and java, I just got the drivers and used it in the
simplest way.

The tests are all built on "synthetic" scenario, I cratead the base, tables,
tests. So it's unlike to have some unexpected behavior happening, but I'll
give a look anyway.

About caching plan / binary protocol (and I know very-little-almost-nothing
about these), it can't be used with psycopg? Let's say that the jdbc driver
use these techniques, shouldn't psycopg do the same? (let-me repeat that I
may not know about what i'm talking here. :) )

2011/5/11 Daniele Varrazzo <daniele(dot)varrazzo(at)gmail(dot)com>

> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Israel Ben Guilherme Fonseca
> <israel(dot)bgf(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > 1) I would say that it is a premature optimization, actually thats a
> Paper
> > for my university, I'm doing some ORMxDirect Access comparisons between
> > different languages and frameworks. After some tests, i got these
> "strange"
> > results, that's why I called you guys. :)
>
> Appreciate, thanks :)
>
> > 2) That would be very nice if we could help to improve psycopg driver. If
> I
> > did a smaller documented-test-suite and sent it to you would it be
> helpful?
>
> Yes, any result that would improve the driver would be of course well
> accepted.
>
> Before going for a well packaged test, have you seen what is the
> difference in the communication? There may be some obvious (after you
> know) design difference, such as the jdbc driver caching the plan, or
> the results, or using the binary protocol.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -- Daniele
>