2010/4/24 Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Well, you missed the most important part: not using cursors at all.
>> Instead of declaring a cursor and looping it to build the array, build
>> it with array(). That's what I've been saying: arrays can completely
>> displace both temp tables _and_ cursors when passing small sets around
> with huge emphasis on the word small.
The rule of thumb I use is 10000 narrow records (scalars, or very
small composites) or 1000 wide/complex records. I routinely pass
extremely complex (3-4 levels nesting) nested composite arrays to the
client for processing -- it is extremely efficient and clean. This of
course is going to depend on hardware and other factors.
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Коротков Александр||Date: 2010-04-25 18:22:29|
|Subject: Planner issue on sorting joining of two tables with limit|
|Previous:||From: Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz||Date: 2010-04-24 14:38:02|
|Subject: Re: Replacing Cursors with Temporary Tables|