From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Daniel Verite <daniel@manitou-mail.org>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Jakub Wartak <jakub.wartak@enterprisedb.com>
Subject: Re: psql's FETCH_COUNT (cursor) is not being respected for CTEs
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2024 16:13:23 -0400
Message-ID: <1748582.1712088803@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b5fbba3d-2914-457e-a701-7892f86c3ea4@manitou-mail.org>
References: <b5fbba3d-2914-457e-a701-7892f86c3ea4@manitou-mail.org>
"Daniel Verite" <daniel@manitou-mail.org> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I do not buy that psql's FETCH_COUNT mode is a sufficient reason
>> to add it. FETCH_COUNT mode is not something you'd use
>> non-interactively
> I should say that I've noticed significant latency improvements with
> FETCH_COUNT retrieving large resultsets, such that it would benefit
> non-interactive use cases.
Do you have a theory for why that is? It's pretty counterintuitive
that it would help at all.
regards, tom lane
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: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, daniel@manitou-mail.org, laurenz.albe@cybertec.at, robertmhaas@gmail.com, jakub.wartak@enterprisedb.com
Subject: Re: psql's FETCH_COUNT (cursor) is not being respected for CTEs
In-Reply-To: <1748582.1712088803@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox