Re: caching query results

From: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>
To: "alex b(dot)" <mailinglists1(at)gmx(dot)de>
Cc: Postgresql General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: caching query results
Date: 2003-05-23 16:55:34
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.33.0305231054510.2604-100000@css120.ihs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, 23 May 2003, alex b. wrote:

>
> scott.marlowe wrote:
> > by the way, jsp supports connection pooling quite well.
> >
> > Do you have a specific development environment you have to work in?
>
> oh yeah, sorry, my bad.
> I am working with perl.
>
> besides: temporary tables also last only one connection, as the
> documentation indicates.
> the script does connect, and after printing everything to the browser it
> dies... as well as the connection to postgres.
>
> opening the script with the commands to show the next few rows would
> again start the same script, but with a different offset...
>
> I'm beginning to give it up, and use a very simple solution: temporary
> files - tab delimited. the script would parse the SQL output (from the
> file) and I bet this would be almost as fast as querying a table, or
> faster... this is just a thought I had, but I think the pure database
> solution is a lot fancier and I'd really want to go for that instead...

I meant to use a regular table that you use as though it were a temp
table. But your temp file system should work just as well too.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-05-23 17:38:37 Re: [ADMIN] Q: Structured index - which one runs faster?
Previous Message Bruno Wolff III 2003-05-23 16:50:20 Re: [ADMIN] Q: Structured index - which one runs faster?