| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jonathan Gardner <jgardner(at)jonathangardner(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-interfaces(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Some quick notes about extending libpq for new protocol |
| Date: | 2003-06-09 15:46:57 |
| Message-ID: | 17644.1055173617@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
Jonathan Gardner <jgardner(at)jonathangardner(dot)net> writes:
> I'll admit -- the current state of PQfn is practically unuseable. However, the
> idea is pretty cool. I think it would be nice to have a direct function call
> mechanism that bypasses the parser.
The ability to prepare a "SELECT foo($1, $2, ...)" statement pretty much
eliminates any performance advantage that PQfn once had. While I've not
had the opportunity to do performance tests, I'd think that a binary
BIND and EXECUTE of such a statement would be about on a par with
FunctionCall.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-06-09 16:28:45 | Re: Proposal to Re-Order Postgresql.Conf, part II |
| Previous Message | Jonathan Gardner | 2003-06-09 15:42:25 | Re: Some quick notes about extending libpq for new protocol |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rudy Lippan | 2003-06-10 15:12:35 | Announce: DBD::Pg 1.30_2 (beta) |
| Previous Message | Jonathan Gardner | 2003-06-09 15:42:25 | Re: Some quick notes about extending libpq for new protocol |