Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API
Дата
Msg-id 9123.1342453658@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API  (Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API  (Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com>)
Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API  (Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Mm.  I still think we should drop it, because it's still a dangerous API
>> that's not necessary for the principal benefit of this feature.

> Yes, it is a secondary feature, but it fits the needs of the actual target
> audience of the single-row feature - various high-level wrappers of libpq.

> Also it is needed for high-performance situations, where the
> single-row-mode fits well even for C clients, except the
> advantage is negated by new malloc-per-row overhead.

Absolutely no evidence has been presented that there's any useful
performance gain to be had there.  Moreover, if there were, we could
probably work a bit harder at making PGresult creation cheaper, rather
than having to expose a dangerous API.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Heikki Linnakangas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: CompactCheckpointerRequestQueue versus pad bytes
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: CompactCheckpointerRequestQueue versus pad bytes