| From: | "Guillaume Smet" <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | david(at)lang(dot)hm |
| Cc: | "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "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 19:29:43 |
| Message-ID: | 1d4e0c10901011129w443a096apac00c9d106669604@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 9:24 PM, <david(at)lang(dot)hm> wrote:
> forgive my ignorance here, but if it's unnamed how can you reference it
> later to take advantage of the parsing?
You can't. That's what unnamed prepared statements are for.
It's not obvious to me that the parsing phase is worth any "caching".
>From my experience, the planning phase takes far much time on complex
queries.
--
Guillaume
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-01 20:24:12 | Re: Poor plan choice in prepared statement |
| Previous Message | Guillaume Smet | 2009-01-01 18:22:56 | Re: Poor plan choice in prepared statement |