Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared
От
Andres Freund
Тема
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared
Дата
Msg-id
20180607194836.zwrsnfjxwa7k7csb@alap3.anarazel.de
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: computing completion tag is expensive for pgbench -S -M prepared Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
On 2018-06-07 20:34:39 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 7 June 2018 at 20:27, Tom Lane wrote: > > Simon Riggs writes: > >> If we're going to compress the protocol, it seems sensible to remove > >> extraneous information first. > > > > Breaking the wire protocol was nowhere in this thread. > > No, it wasn't. But there is another thread on the subject of > compressing libpq, which is what I was referring to. > > Andres' patch is clearly very efficient at adding the SELECT tag. I am > questioning if we can remove that need altogether. That'd be a wire protocol break. We'd have to add compatibilities for both things in the client, wait a couple years, and then change. Or we could make it an optional thing based on a client option passed at connect. Which'd also take a good while. Those seem extremely disproportionate complicated solutions for the problem. Nor can I believe that a "SELECT " in the resultset is a meaningful space issue, making it even worthwhile to break compat in the first place. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
От: Tom Lane
Дата: