| From: | Marcus Engene <mengpg(at)engene(dot)se> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: bind variables, soft vs hard parse |
| Date: | 2005-11-16 08:56:44 |
| Message-ID: | 437AF44C.1010209@engene.se |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Douglas McNaught wrote:
>>Which will be the same as the second call. There is quite a big
>>difference in performance using bind variables.
>>
>>Does Postgres work the same? Where can I go for more info?
>
> You can do this (or close to it) but you need to explicitly PREPARE
> the query (or use the protocol-level prepare, which some client
> libraries will do for you). See the SQL documentation for PREPARE.
>
> -Doug
Hi,
But this is of no use in a web-context. According to the docs, this
prepare is per session.
This sql cache I think is a really good thing. Is there a reason
Postgres hasn't got it? Would it be very hard to implement? From
a naive perspective; make a hashvalue from the sql-string to
quickly find the cached one, a "last used"-list for keeping
track of which to delete when cache full etc seems close to
trivial. Does the architecture/internal flow make it hard
actually reuse the query data structure?
Thanks for the answer.
Best regards,
Marcus
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Grzegorz Jaskiewicz | 2005-11-16 09:05:36 | question about count(b) where b is a custom type |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2005-11-16 08:47:33 | Re: PG_DUMP and table locking in PG7.4 |