| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Again, sorry, caching. |
| Date: | 2002-03-16 17:26:43 |
| Message-ID: | 20020316090846.K71606-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I was thinking that it could be implemented as a keyword or comment in a query.
> Such as:
>
> select * from table where column = 'foo' cacheable
> or
> select * from table where column = 'bar' /* cacheable */
> Having caching within PostgreSQL will be good for data integrity. Application
> caches can't tell when an update/delete/insert happens, they often have to use
> a time-out mechanism.
>
> OK, let me have it, tell me how terrible an idea this is. tell me how wrong I
> am.
I don't think it's a bad idea, but a cache that takes a query string (or
subquery string) and looks for a match based on that is flawed without
special consideration to non-cacheable functions and constructs
(CURRENT_USER, things that depend on timezone, things that depend on
datestyle). We'd also need to work out an appropriate mechanism to deal
with cache invalidation and adding things to the cache.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-03-16 20:38:01 | Re: Client/Server compression? |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2002-03-16 16:56:05 | plsql as an officially supported language? |