| From: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Werner Scholtes <Werner(dot)Scholtes(at)heuboe(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Divakar Singh <dpsmails(at)yahoo(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: performance libpq vs JDBC |
| Date: | 2010-12-16 12:14:32 |
| Message-ID: | 4D0A02A8.5050206@archonet.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 16/12/10 09:21, Werner Scholtes wrote:
> I assume that the wire protocol of PostgreSQL allows to transmit
> multiple rows at once, but libpq doesn't have an interface to access it.
> Is that right?
Sounds wrong to me. The libpq client is the default reference
implementation of the protocol. If there were large efficiencies that
could be copied, they would be.
Anyway - you don't need to assume what's in the protocol. It's
documented here:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/protocol.html
I'd stick wireshark or some other network analyser on the two sessions -
see exactly what is different.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Werner Scholtes | 2010-12-16 12:28:51 | Re: performance libpq vs JDBC |
| Previous Message | Eric Comeau | 2010-12-16 12:12:03 | How to get FK to use new index without restarting the database |