Re: copy vs. C function

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jon Nelson <jnelson+pgsql(at)jamponi(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: copy vs. C function
Date: 2011-12-14 15:25:30
Message-ID: 7080.1323876330@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Jon Nelson <jnelson+pgsql(at)jamponi(dot)net> writes:
> Regarding caching, I tried caching it across calls by making the
> TupleDesc static and only initializing it once.
> When I tried that, I got:

> ERROR: number of columns (6769856) exceeds limit (1664)

> I tried to find some documentation or examples that cache the
> information, but couldn't find any.

You might find reading record_in to be helpful. What it caches is not
exactly what you need to, I think, but it shows the general principles.
There are lots of other functions that use fn_extra to cache info, too.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jon Nelson 2011-12-14 15:40:01 Re: copy vs. C function
Previous Message idc danny 2011-12-14 14:32:03 Re: copy vs. C function