Re: Poor plan choice in prepared statement

From: "Guillaume Smet" <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Scott Carey" <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com>, bricklen <bricklen(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Poor plan choice in prepared statement
Date: 2009-01-01 18:22:56
Message-ID: 1d4e0c10901011022v4a1d5eeaidc2692a7729e79df@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> I think it has been shown enough times that the performance drop caused
> by a worse plan can be orders of magnitudes worse than what's gained by
> producing the plan only once. It does not seem a bad idea to provide a
> way to carry out only the parse phase, and postpone planning until the
> parameters have been received.

It's already done in 8.3 for unnamed plans, isn't it?

--
Guillaume

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Guillaume Smet 2009-01-01 19:29:43 Re: Poor plan choice in prepared statement
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-01-01 13:44:50 Re: Poor plan choice in prepared statement