From: | Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net> |
---|---|
To: | mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jeff Davis <list-pgsql-hackers(at)dynworks(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Again, sorry, caching, (Tom What do you think: function |
Date: | 2002-03-19 14:16:41 |
Message-ID: | 1016547402.18648.193.camel@mouse.copelandconsulting.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2002-03-19 at 07:46, mlw wrote:
[snip]
> Right now, the function manager can only return one value, or one set of values
> for a column. It should be possible, but require a lot of research, to enable
> the function manager to return a set of rows. If we could get that working, it
> could be fairly trivial to implement a cache as a contrib project. It would
> work something like this:
>
> select querycache("select * from mytable where foo='bar') ;
Interesting concept...but how would you know when the cache has become
dirty? That would give you a set of rows...but I don't understand what
would let you know your result set is invalid?
Perhaps: select querycache( foobar_event, "select * from my table where
foo='bar'" ) ; would automatically create a listen for you??
>
> This does two things that I would like to see: The ability to cache subselects
> independent of the full query. The ability to control which queries get cached.
>
> If we can get this row functionality in the function manager for 7.3, we could
> then implement MANY MANY enterprise level functionalities. Remote queries,
> query caching, external tables, etc. as contrib projects rather than full blown
> modifications to PostgreSQL.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this concept would also be applicable to
some clustering/distributed query (that what you meant by remote
queries) needs too?
Greg
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-03-19 14:18:37 | Re: Time for 7.2.1? |
Previous Message | Greg Copeland | 2002-03-19 14:02:26 | Re: Again, sorry, caching. |