Re: [PERFORMANCE] Stored Procedures

From: Marcos <mjs_ops(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
Cc: Rikard Pavelic <rikard(dot)pavelic(at)zg(dot)htnet(dot)hr>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PERFORMANCE] Stored Procedures
Date: 2006-01-23 08:14:14
Message-ID: 1138004054.949.10.camel@servidor
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Em Sex, 2006-01-20 às 15:34 -0600, Jim C. Nasby escreveu:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 08:38:23PM +0100, Rikard Pavelic wrote:
> > This would solve problems with prepare which is per session, so for
> > prepared function to be
> > optimal one must use same connection.
>
> If you're dealing with something that's performance critical you're not
> going to be constantly re-connecting anyway, so I don't see what the
> issue is.

This one was my doubt, perhaps in based desktop applications this is
true, but in web applications this is not the re-connecting is
constant :(.

Then the preprare not have very advantage because your duration is per
session.

Marcos.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alessandro Baretta 2006-01-23 10:31:23 Re: Suspending SELECTs
Previous Message pgsql-performance 2006-01-22 20:29:01 Re: tsearch2 headline and postgresql.conf