Re: Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()
От | Igal @ Lucee.org |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proposal: RETURNING primary_key() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 57014255.4010100@lucee.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proposal: RETURNING primary_key() (Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/3/2016 8:21 AM, Dave Cramer wrote:
https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/488 is fixed.
Also, as I mentioned in the ticket, I can't imagine RETURNING * being performant if, for example, I INSERT a large chunk of data like an image data or an uploaded file.
Igal
That's good to know, but unfortunately pgjdbc is unusable for us untilOn 9 March 2016 at 20:49, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:On 3/8/2016 5:12 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
Are there good reasons to use pgjdbc over pgjdbc-ng then?Maturity, support for older versions (-ng just punts on support for anything except new releases) and older JDBC specs, completeness of support for some extensions. TBH I haven't done a ton with -ng yet.I'd like to turn this question around. Are there good reasons to use -ng over pgjdbc ?As to your question, you may be interested to know that pgjdbc is more performant than ng.
https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/488 is fixed.
Also, as I mentioned in the ticket, I can't imagine RETURNING * being performant if, for example, I INSERT a large chunk of data like an image data or an uploaded file.
Igal
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: