| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Single client performance on trivial SELECTs |
| Date: | 2011-04-15 03:16:03 |
| Message-ID: | 26333.1302837363@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:43:16AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... I think a lot of this ultimately
>> traces to the extensible, data-type-agnostic design philosophy. The
>> fact that we don't know what an integer is until we look in pg_type,
>> and don't know what an "=" operator does until we look up its
>> properties, is great from a flexibility point of view; but this sort
>> of query is where the costs become obvious.
> Is it time to revisit that decision?
Umm ... what are you proposing? Toss user-defined data types and
user-defined operators overboard? No interest in that here.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-04-15 03:26:44 | Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2011-04-15 02:56:10 | Re: WIP: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name |