| From: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Ashley Cambrell <ash(at)freaky-namuh(dot)com>, Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 7.3 schedule |
| Date: | 2002-04-12 03:58:01 |
| Message-ID: | 3CB65B49.93F2F790@tpf.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I believe Hannu's numbers, but in any case they're fairly
> irrelevant to the argument about whether a special protocol is useful.
> He wasn't testing textually-long queries, but rather the planning
> overhead, which is more or less independent of the length of any literal
> constants involved (especially if they're not part of the WHERE clause).
> Saving query plans via PREPARE seems quite sufficient, and appropriate,
> to tackle the planner-overhead issue.
Just a confirmation.
Someone is working on PREPARE/EXECUTE ?
What about Karel's work ?
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2002-04-12 04:09:28 | Re: RFC: Restructuring pg_aggregate |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-04-12 03:25:07 | Re: 7.3 schedule |