| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Performance bug in prepared statement binding in 9.2? |
| Date: | 2013-12-31 17:55:38 |
| Message-ID: | 27642.1388512538@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Tom,
>> There's an abbreviated version of this argument in the comments in
>> my proposed patch at
>> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/11927.1384199294@sss.pgh.pa.us
>> What I'm hoping will happen next is that the complainants will hot-patch
>> that and see if it fixes their problems. We can't really determine
>> what to do without that information.
> Unfortunately, the original reporter of this issue will not be available
> for testing for 2-3 weeks, and I haven't been able to devise a synthetic
> test which clearly shows the issue.
Ping? I've been waiting on committing that patch pending some real-world
testing. It'd be nice to resolve this question before we ship 9.3.3,
which I'm supposing will be sometime in January ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Johansen | 2014-01-02 18:39:53 | Re: DATE_TRUNC() and GROUP BY? |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-12-30 21:29:07 | Re: Recommendations for partitioning? |