| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: AW: AW: LIMIT in DECLARE CURSOR: request for comments |
| Date: | 2000-11-03 16:59:49 |
| Message-ID: | 6985.973270789@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> writes:
>> Right. So what do you think about a hint that takes the form of a SET
>> variable for the fetch percentage to assume for a DECLARE CURSOR?
> Since we don't have other hints that are embedded directly into the SQL
> that sounds perfect.
> The not so offhand question for me is whether to use this percentage
> for non cursor selects also. Imho both should (at least in default)
> behave the same.
Not at all, since in a non-cursor select you *must* retrieve all the
data. I can't see any reason to optimize that on any other basis than
total execution time.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-11-03 17:12:39 | Re: Problem with 2 avcuums in parallel |
| Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB | 2000-11-03 16:32:21 | AW: AW: LIMIT in DECLARE CURSOR: request for comments |