| From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Hannu Krosing'" <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
| Cc: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'chris(at)bitmead(dot)com'" <chris(at)bitmead(dot)com>, "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | AW: AW: [HACKERS] Another nasty cache problem |
| Date: | 2000-02-10 12:35:22 |
| Message-ID: | 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C603FDC247@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Is'nt the "blank portal" the name of the cursor you get when you just
> do a select without creating a cursor ?
Yes, is that still so ?
>
> > I don't really see any advantage, that psql does not do a fetch loop
> > with a portal.
>
> It only increases traffic, as explicit fetch commands need to be sent
> to backend. If one does not declare a cursor, an implicit
> fetch all from
> blank is performed.
I don't really see how a fetch every x rows (e.g.1000) would add significant
overhead.
The first fetch could still be done implicit, it would only fetch 1000
instead of fetch all.
Thus there would only be overhead for large result sets, where the
wasted memory is of real concern.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rini Dutta | 2000-02-10 13:40:29 | how to make libpq on winnt using the 'win32.mak's |
| Previous Message | Chris | 2000-02-10 12:24:32 | libpq |