| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeroen Vermeulen <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Bart Samwel <bart(at)samwel(dot)tk>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Avoiding bad prepared-statement plans. |
| Date: | 2010-02-28 08:18:26 |
| Message-ID: | m2hbp1ydrh.fsf@hi-media.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> 1) People preparing statements to save on parse+plan time; and
> 2) People preparing statements to get convenenient param placement.
>
> I suspect that most of (1) also want (2), but many of (2) don't care much
> about (1) and are just preparing statements for sql-injection safety (param
> placement), because they've been told to by someone, because their library
> does it for them, etc.
>
> So: Would it be easier to handle control of replan vs no-replan at PREPARE
> time? Or would that have very much the same protocol/pl change issues?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/libpq-exec.html#LIBPQ-EXEC-MAIN
PQexecParams
Submits a command to the server and waits for the result, with the
ability to pass parameters separately from the SQL command text.
So I think what you're talking about is already in there.
--
dim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2010-02-28 09:48:48 | Re: Anyone know if Alvaro is OK? |
| Previous Message | Mark Mielke | 2010-02-28 07:52:55 | Re: Avoiding bad prepared-statement plans. |