| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: DISCARD ALL ; stored procedures |
| Date: | 2011-01-06 22:52:10 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTi=2cWaESwzKH71LyV--+XDV6B6zbT54Ng4pwHxE@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> If it's "performance" vs. "correctness", you can guess what I'm going to
> vote for, however, in this case, I can't see how either of the other
> options would perform better than a discard-like approach. If people
> are already using 'discard all;' then they're already throwing away
> their plans for prepared queries, it strikes me as unlikely that they'd
> have an issue with also getting rid of stored procedure plans. If they
> do, they could certainly use the individual 'discard' statements
> instead (presuming we implement this with a new discard argument).
If DISCARD ALL doesn't flush this stuff, I'd consider that an outright
bug. Does it?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2011-01-06 22:57:13 | Re: Streaming base backups |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2011-01-06 22:22:10 | Re: DISCARD ALL ; stored procedures |