Re: modifying the tbale function

Returning k rows would be a reasonable solution but which functions need to
be modified to achieve this.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>; "Islam Hegazy"
<islheg(at)hotmail(dot)com>; <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 4:57 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] modifying the tbale function

> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> I'm not convinced it would be a huge gain anyway. Switching madly in and
>> out of the perl interpreter at least is a known performance problem, IIRC
>
> Returning control to the backend for every row returned would likely be
> excessive, but you could return once every k rows and get most of the
> benefits of both approaches (k might be on the order of 1000). The problem
> with the current approach is that it makes returning large result sets
> from PL functions very expensive, since they need to be spooled to disk.
>
> As for using threads, that's pretty much a non-starter: we can't safely
> allow calls into the backend from multiple concurrent threads, and I doubt
> that will chance any time soon.
>
> -Neil
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>