From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jim Nasby <jim(dot)nasby(at)openscg(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Faster methods for getting SPI results |
Date: | 2017-03-06 20:13:08 |
Message-ID: | 98da4d04-796a-fad7-474d-79c7a9808d24@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/5/17 16:07, Jim Nasby wrote:
>> There is nothing that requires us to materialize the results into an
>> actual list of actual rows. We could wrap the SPI_tuptable into a
>> Python object and implement __getitem__ or __iter__ to emulate sequence
>> or mapping access.
> Would it be possible to have that just pull tuples directly from the
> executor? The overhead of populating the tuplestore just to drain it
> again can become quite significant, and AFAICT it's completely unnecessary.
I think there are many options, depending on what you want. If you want
to materialize the result, then you have to materialize it somewhere,
and then make a Python object around that. Or you could make an
iterator interface that just reads a tuple at a time. Or maybe there
are other options.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-03-06 20:16:49 | Re: rename pg_log directory? |
Previous Message | Andreas Karlsson | 2017-03-06 20:12:20 | Re: rename pg_log directory? |