| From: | "Igal (at) Lucee(dot)org" <igal(at)lucee(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Ian Barwick <ian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: RETURNING primary_key() |
| Date: | 2016-04-03 16:18:29 |
| Message-ID: | 57014255.4010100@lucee.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/3/2016 8:21 AM, Dave Cramer wrote:
>
> On 9 March 2016 at 20:49, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com
> <mailto:craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>> wrote:
>
> On 3/8/2016 5:12 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
>
>
> Are there good reasons to use pgjdbc over pgjdbc-ng then?
>
>
> Maturity, support for older versions (-ng just punts on support
> for anything except new releases) and older JDBC specs,
> completeness of support for some extensions. TBH I haven't done a
> ton with -ng yet.
>
>
> I'd like to turn this question around. Are there good reasons to use
> -ng over pgjdbc ?
>
> As to your question, you may be interested to know that pgjdbc is more
> performant than ng.
That's good to know, but unfortunately pgjdbc is unusable for us until
https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/488 is fixed.
Also, as I mentioned in the ticket, I can't imagine RETURNING * being
performant if, for example, I INSERT a large chunk of data like an image
data or an uploaded file.
Igal
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-04-03 16:32:44 | Re: Add schema-qualified relnames in constraint error messages. |
| Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2016-04-03 16:15:17 | Re: pgbench more operators & functions |