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

Re: Avoiding bad prepared-statement plans.

From: Bart Samwel <bart(at)samwel(dot)tk>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeroen Vermeulen <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Avoiding bad prepared-statement plans.
Date: 2010-02-11 12:48:14
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 13:41, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Bart Samwel <bart(at)samwel(dot)tk> wrote:
> > Anyhow, I have no clue how much time the planner takes. Can anybody
> provide
> > any statistics in that regard?
> It depends a great deal on the query, which is one of the things that
> makes implementing this rather challenging.

But I guess you can probably expect it to be on the same order for the same
query in generic form and with filled-in parameters? Because that's the
underlying assumption of the "ratio" criterion -- that re-planning with
filled-in parameters takes about as much time as the initial planning run


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-02-11 12:53:28
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove old-style VACUUM FULL (which was known for a little while
Previous:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-02-11 12:44:09
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby server continuously retry restoring the next WAL

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