This is a discussion on Open items for 8.2 within the pgsql Hackers forums, part of the PostgreSQL category; --> Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 03:07 schrieb Bruce Momjian: > > Here are the open ...
| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 03:07 schrieb Bruce Momjian: > > Here are the open items for 8.2: > > > > http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems > > This host seems to be offline. What about using the wiki? The host is fine. postgresql.org DNS is broken. Reference the host directly: http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgopenitems -- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend |
| ||||
| Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: >> Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 05:58 schrieb Tom Lane: >>> A couple of recently discussed FE/BE protocol issues are: not storing a >>> plan at all for unnamed-statement cases, and thus allowing bind >>> parameters to be treated as constants; allowing parameter types to go >>> unresolved rather than throwing an error. Perhaps it's too late to >>> consider these for 8.2, but they seem no more invasive than some other >>> items on the open-issues list. > >> Do we have a patch for that today? > > We could have a patch for the first one today --- I was thinking about > it last night and intending to code it today. The second one is merely > a matter of removing an error check that exists now; the question really > is do people want that behavior. (I asked that on the jdbc list and got > zero response, so actually I was thinking that it was a dead issue; but > as long as it's on the open-items list we ought to discuss it.) I personally think it's a good idea to do it, as it should improve the plans for one-shot queries. Unfortunately I don't certainly know how the JDBC driver issues queries when called through a PreparedStatement but without a "prepare-threshold"[*] set. If it uses the unnamed-statement, then I guess the proposed change would be a win. Best Regards Michael Paesold [*] This option determines, after how many executes of a prepared statement, the driver will switch to server-side prepares. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|