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

Re: eWeek Poll: Which database is most critical to your

From: Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>
To: "Henshall, Stuart - WCP" <SHenshall(at)westcountrypublications(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: eWeek Poll: Which database is most critical to your
Date: 2002-02-27 22:34:58
Message-ID: 1014849299.2503.27.camel@jiro (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2002-02-27 at 10:51, Henshall, Stuart - WCP wrote:
> If I understand correctly you'll be taking matching the on the original 
> query string, then pulling out the previous plan, rather than doing all 
> the planning again? Or where you thinking of storing the resultant tuples 
> (seems far more diffcult to do effciently)?

Well, those are really two different features. The second (caching
entire result sets based upon the _exact_ query string) is implemented
by MySQL, and is probably the more exotic feature of the two. There is
some debate about whether this is even worthwhile, or just results in
better benchmark results...

As Tom points out, the first feature (caching query plans) is probably
better implemented by allowing application developers to prepare queries
and specify their own parameters. This is a fairly conventional RDBMS
feature and it is already on the TODO list.

> Either way would be handy for me though as I have a number of clients who 
> all basically ask the same query and then ask it again every few minutes 
> to update themselves. Therefore this sounds like something that would 
> improve performance for me.

Good to know...



Neil Conway <neilconway(at)rogers(dot)com>

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Greg CopelandDate: 2002-02-27 23:03:23
Subject: Re: single task postgresql
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-02-27 22:03:30
Subject: Re: Arrays vs separate system catalogs

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group