| From: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au |
| Cc: | satoshi(dot)nagayasu(at)gmail(dot)com, adarsh(dot)sharma(at)orkash(dot)com, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Memcached for Database server |
| Date: | 2011-05-18 05:59:09 |
| Message-ID: | 20110518.145909.779201810222127031.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> How do you handle statements that rely on current_timestamp, random(),
> etc? What about if their reliance is via a function? Is that just an
> understood limitation of the cache, that it'll cache even queries that
> don't really make sense to cache?
Probably we should cache the result of a query which containts no
functions or a query which only contains immutable functions.
Also we should be carefull about views, which may be a result of non
immutable functions.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | satoshi.nagayasu | 2011-05-18 06:20:12 | Re: Memcached for Database server |
| Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2011-05-18 00:52:07 | Re: re-install postgres/postGIS without Loosing data?? |