> [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> > Hi, Bruce,
> >
> > I've only just picked up the thread on optimizations (I get the digest
> for
> > the pgsql-sql list). I really feel that a lot of effort could be saved
> with
> > some good benefits if a stored proc mechanism is put into place. Once
> that
> > has been done, it can be used to store temporary plans (procedures) for
> > ad-hoc queries which are released on the termination of the connection.
> > However, I think that a lot of users will develop stored procs to
> replace a
> > lot of their existing common SQL, in order to (partially) optimize their
> > systems. Perhaps in the PREPARE statement we could add a facility to
> allow
> > the user to specify the TTL of the cached proc for an ad-hoc query.
> >
> > When I talk about stored procs, I don't mean functions. We already have
> > those. I mean procedures that are able to return a rowset. Just to
> make
> > sure nobody gets the wrong idea.
>
> Not sure why our functions can't return tuples.
>
> > Also, has anything happened about the idea to get PG to cluster
> (somebody
> > mentioned Beowulf)?
>
> No one has mentioned this.
>
I believe he's referring to having PostgreSQL have distributed
loading across multiple machines. I've been thinking of testing a Beowulf
setup here for fault tolerance and fail-over. It's might be the most
elegant and easy solution to implement, starting with a Red Hat box.
It's time to move www.airforce.com to PostgreSQL and PHP :)
-DEJ