| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal |
| Date: | 2006-05-09 13:31:56 |
| Message-ID: | 10726.1147181516@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com> writes:
> Feature proposal :
> A way to store query results in a named buffer and reuse them in the next
> queries.
Why not just fix the speed issues you're complaining about with temp
tables? I see no reason to invent a new concept.
(Now, "just fix" might be easier said than done, but inventing an
essentially duplicate facility would be a lot of work too.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-09 13:56:01 | Re: current version: Patch - Have psql show current values |
| Previous Message | Dhanaraj M | 2006-05-09 12:04:26 | Need a help - Performance issues |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Steve Atkins | 2006-05-09 14:41:16 | Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
| Previous Message | mcelroy, tim | 2006-05-09 12:45:16 | Re: Memory and/or cache issues? |