From: | Milan Oparnica <milan(dot)opa(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PERSISTANT PREPARE (another point of view) |
Date: | 2008-07-16 20:51:56 |
Message-ID: | g5ln0n$25mi$1@news.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Milan Oparnica wrote:
>
> It's simply to complicated to return recordsets through server-side
> stored procedures. They are obviously designed to do complex data
> manipulation, returning few output variables informing the caller about
> final results. Returning records through sets of user-defined-types is
> memory and performance waste (please see my previous post as reply to
> Steve for more details). Plus it's hard to maintain and make
> improvements to such a system. I hate to see 800 user types made for
> every query we made as stored procedure.
Is this topic completely out of scope in Postgre ?
If I'm missing something too obvious or too important, please let me
know what.
I run over and over through internet and Postgre documentation and still
found nothing.
Is there a better place to communicate with Postgre developers ?
Sincerely,
Milan Oparnica
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2008-07-17 06:13:41 | Re: PERSISTANT PREPARE (another point of view) |
Previous Message | Volkan YAZICI | 2008-07-16 20:20:20 | pg_advisory_lock(bigint) vs. LOCK TABLE |