From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "alex b(dot)" <mailinglists1(at)gmx(dot)de> |
Cc: | Postgresql General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: caching query results |
Date: | 2003-05-23 16:55:34 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0305231054510.2604-100000@css120.ihs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 23 May 2003, alex b. wrote:
>
> scott.marlowe wrote:
> > by the way, jsp supports connection pooling quite well.
> >
> > Do you have a specific development environment you have to work in?
>
> oh yeah, sorry, my bad.
> I am working with perl.
>
> besides: temporary tables also last only one connection, as the
> documentation indicates.
> the script does connect, and after printing everything to the browser it
> dies... as well as the connection to postgres.
>
> opening the script with the commands to show the next few rows would
> again start the same script, but with a different offset...
>
> I'm beginning to give it up, and use a very simple solution: temporary
> files - tab delimited. the script would parse the SQL output (from the
> file) and I bet this would be almost as fast as querying a table, or
> faster... this is just a thought I had, but I think the pure database
> solution is a lot fancier and I'd really want to go for that instead...
I meant to use a regular table that you use as though it were a temp
table. But your temp file system should work just as well too.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-05-23 17:38:37 | Re: [ADMIN] Q: Structured index - which one runs faster? |
Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2003-05-23 16:50:20 | Re: [ADMIN] Q: Structured index - which one runs faster? |