From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Joshua Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | Billy Earney <billy(dot)earney(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: query cache |
Date: | 2012-03-24 20:33:30 |
Message-ID: | 29069.1332621210@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joshua Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> If you want to do something radical and new, then come up with a way
> for a client to request and then reuse a complete query plan by
> passing it to the server.
[ raised eyebrow ] That seems like a complete nonstarter on two
different grounds: cache invalidation needs (client won't know if plan
is stale) and security issues (pass broken plan to server, crash
server). Those problems could be avoided if the client simply has a
token for a plan that's kept on the server side ... but how is that
concept different from a prepared statement?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Billy Earney | 2012-03-24 21:15:41 | Re: query cache |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-03-24 20:24:29 | Re: Fix PL/Python metadata when there is no result |