Re: Fwd: [JDBC] Re: 9.4-1207 behaves differently with server side prepared statements compared to 9.2-1102
От | Albe Laurenz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Fwd: [JDBC] Re: 9.4-1207 behaves differently with server side prepared statements compared to 9.2-1102 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | A737B7A37273E048B164557ADEF4A58B537BDFFD@ntex2010a.host.magwien.gv.at обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Fwd: [JDBC] Re: 9.4-1207 behaves differently with server side prepared statements compared to 9.2-1102 (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Fwd: [JDBC] Re: 9.4-1207 behaves differently with
server side prepared statements compared to 9.2-1102
Re: Fwd: [JDBC] Re: 9.4-1207 behaves differently with server side prepared statements compared to 9.2-1102 |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule wrote: > I like a strategy based on risks. Probably there are situation, when the generic plan is great every > time - INSERTs, UPDATEs via PK, simple SELECTs via PK. generic plan can be well if almost all data has > similar probability. Elsewhere on bigger data, the probability of pretty slow plan is higher, and then > we should to prefer custom plan. > > so the strategy - if cost of generic plan is less than some MAGIC CONSTANT (can be specified by GUC), > then use generic plan. Elsewhere use a custom plan everytime. > > It allow to controll the plan reusing. When MAGIC CONSTANT = 0 .. use custom plan everytime, When > MAGIC CONSTANT = M, then use generic plan always. I have a different idea: What about a GUC "custom_plan_threshold" that controls after how many executions a generic plan will be considered, with a default value of 5. A value of -1 could disable generic plans. Yours, Laurenz Albe
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: