public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Laurenz Albe <[email protected]>
To: Joseph Hammerman <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: SQL: Chaining versus Pipelining
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2024 09:48:24 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHs7QM8VJ1pAYR7zdJ9GwbXhVbJEUnLw+sM=bMNNrXFMvaji8g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHs7QM8VJ1pAYR7zdJ9GwbXhVbJEUnLw+sM=bMNNrXFMvaji8g@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 2024-07-08 at 15:26 -0700, Joseph Hammerman wrote:
> In Postgres Weekly, I encountered this interesting article. The documentation on the use
> of AND CHAIN is here. A co-worker is interested in the difference between chaining
> and using the pipelining syntax.
> 
> They look pretty similar to me; it could be that one implementation is PG specific and
> not part of the SQL standard or something. Can anyone shed any light for us?

COMMIT AND CHAIN and pipelining have little in common, except that they can both
reduce the overhead caused by a high latency between database client and server.

COMMIT AND CHAIN just saves you a round trip.

Pipelining allows you to send the next database request before you get the response
to the first one.

Here is an article that describes pipelining:
https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com/en/pipeline-mode-better-performance-on-slow-network/

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: SQL: Chaining versus Pipelining
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox