From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Scrollable cursors and Sort performance |
Date: | 2006-02-11 17:46:43 |
Message-ID: | 200602111746.k1BHkhs02642@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 11:32:02AM -0600, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > I think the point that Martijn was trying to make was that per our docs
> > it would be perfectly acceptable for us to make any cursor NO SCROLL
> > implicitly if it means less work for the optimizer.
>
> Ok, I take that back. The actual quote[1] is:
>
> "Depending upon the complexity of the query's execution plan, specifying
> SCROLL may impose a performance penalty on the query's execution time."
>
> Clearly that says it can affect execution time, not that we're free to
> alter the default behavior at will.
>
> But speaking of documentation, it doesn't actually say what the default
> is. Care update that, or should I formally submit a patch?
Patch please.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Florian Weimer | 2006-02-11 17:52:04 | Re: Upcoming re-releases |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-02-11 17:44:35 | Re: Scrollable cursors and Sort performance |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-02-11 17:53:18 | Re: Skipping VACUUM of indexes when no work required |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-02-11 17:44:35 | Re: Scrollable cursors and Sort performance |