Re: About binaryTransfer.

Hi Dave,

Did you check my pull-request?
https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/pull/128

I don't want to use 9.2-1004 Driver, because it has some bugs
about setQueryTimeout fixed by Heikki(*).
(*) http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/52A0D28A.7040902@vmware.com

So I need the PostgreSQL Driver 9.3-1101 have good performance
like 9.2-1004 as soon as possible.

Could you check it please?
If I'm missing something, please tell me it!

regards,
------------------------
Tomonari Katsumata


(2014/03/06 18:13), Tomonari Katsumata wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> I've misunderstood the behavior of this problem.
> The main problem is that the Describe message is send/receive
> repeatedly, if user don't want to do so.
>
> The pull-request I've sent before(#124) didn't solve the problem.
>
> Now, I fixed it and sent a new pull-request.
> https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/pull/128
>
> Please check it!
>
> regards,
> ----------------------
> Tomonari Katsumata

>
> (2014/02/23 9:34), Tomonari Katsumata wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> > I sent a Pull Request about this.
> > https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/pull/124
> >
> > regards,
> > -------------------
> > Tomonari Katsumata
> >
> >
> > 2014-02-21 21:09 GMT+09:00 Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>:
> >
> >> Please submit a Pull Request
> >>
> >> Dave Cramer
> >>
> >> dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
> >> http://www.credativ.ca
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Tomonari Katsumata <
> >> katsumata.tomonari@po.ntts.co.jp> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Mikko,
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for the explanation.
> >>>
> >>> I agree with your proposal adding prepareThreshold=-1.
> >>>
> >>> If there are no objection, I'll do for it!
> >>>
> >>> regards,
> >>> ----------------
> >>> Tomonari Katsumata
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> (2014/02/21 16:50), Mikko Tiihonen wrote:
> >>>> Before the patch the functionality was (if binaryTransfer=true):
> >>>> - prepared statements after prepareThreshold were done in binary mode
> >>>> - forceBinary=true could be enabled to force all statements (prepared +
> >>> one-shot) to be executed in binary mode (at cost of extra round-trip)
> >>>>
> >>>> After the patch in question (if binaryTransfer=true):
> >>>> - All prepared statements have extra round-trip before on first use and
> >>> are immediately in binary mode
> >>>> - forceBinary=true can be enabled to force also one-shot statements to
> >>> be executed in binary mode (at cost of extra round-trip)
> >>>>
> >>>> Since there are users that use prepared statements in one-shot way
> >>> (prepare+execute+discard) the patch adds a mandatory extra round-trip for
> >>> them.
> >>>>
> >>>> As a side note: the forceBinary is meant only as a debug flag (used for
> >>> example in pgjdbc tests), not for production use.
> >>>>
> >>>> So the only thing the before-state could not do was to use binary
> >>> transfers for the first prepared statement execution. This is because
> >>> setting prepareThreshold=0 disables the prepare instead of preparing before
> >>> first use.
> >>>>
> >>>> I propose we revert that patch and instead add support for
> >>> prepareThreshold=-1 which would force prepare+describe to be done even for
> >>> the first execution. That would allow users to keep controlling the
> >>> behavior instead of forcing binary transfers immediately?
> >>>> Alternatively we can separate the binary transfer logic from statement
> >>> prepare threshold and add a separate binaryThreshold.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Mikko
> >>>> ________________________________________
> >>>> From: pgsql-jdbc-owner@postgresql.org <pgsql-jdbc-owner@postgresql.org>
> >>> on behalf of Tomonari Katsumata <katsumata.tomonari@po.ntts.co.jp>
> >>>> Sent: 21 February 2014 08:40
> >>>> To: pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org
> >>>> Subject: [JDBC] About binaryTransfer.
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I have a peformance trouble with 9.3-1100 driver.
> >>>> Running same application(*) with 9.2-1004 and 9.3-1100,
> >>>> It does another behavior.
> >>>> (*) Retrieving 9990 rows with preparedStatement.
> >>>>
> >>>> 9.2-1004:
> >>>> Always flags = 16.
> >>>> ----
> >>>> 14:09:55.730 (1) simple execute,
> >>>> handler=org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement$
> >>> StatementResultHandler@8232a5d,
> >>>> maxRows=0, fetchSize=0, flags=16
> >>>> 14:09:55.878 (1) simple execute,
> >>>> handler=org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement$
> >>> StatementResultHandler@34e671de,
> >>>> maxRows=0, fetchSize=0, flags=16
> >>>> ----
> >>>>
> >>>> 9.3-1100
> >>>> Repeatedly flags = 48 and 16.
> >>>> The count of "flags=16" is same with 9.2-1004, so
> >>>> "flags=48" is extra executing.
> >>>> ----
> >>>> 14:20:34.991 (1) simple execute,
> >>>> handler=org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement$
> >>> StatementResultHandler@19cdbc83,
> >>>> maxRows=0, fetchSize=0, flags=48
> >>>> 14:20:34.992 (1) simple execute,
> >>>> handler=org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement$
> >>> StatementResultHandler@304b0cbc,
> >>>> maxRows=0, fetchSize=0, flags=16
> >>>> ----
> >>>>
> >>>> This change has caused by below commit.
> >>>> https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/commit/dbf76c2d662896c5703cf20d7362e1
> >>> d061e1e43f
> >>>>
> >>>> It seems that binarytransfer mode is good at dealing with
> >>>> big-data(many columns?many rows?), but some packets are
> >>>> sent/received for this function, right?
> >>>>
> >>>> I want to make 9.3-1100 driver do old behavior like 9.2-1004.
> >>>> What can I do ?
> >>>>
> >>>> regards,
> >>>> ----------------
> >>>> Tomonari Katsumata
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
> >>>> To make changes to your subscription:
> >>>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
> >>> To make changes to your subscription:
> >>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>