X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [64.117.224.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A7CAD1B8C3 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2003 04:29:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([64.117.224.193]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [64.117.224.130]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 98699-06 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2003 01:28:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: from smtp016.mail.yahoo.com (smtp016.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.113]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7256AD1B8CE for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2003 01:28:46 -0300 (ADT) Received: from pcp01341166pcs.wilog301.pa.comcast.net (HELO europa.janwieck.net) (janwieck@68.80.245.191 with login) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Aug 2003 04:28:45 -0000 Received: from Yahoo.com (ganymed.janwieck.net [192.168.192.17]) (authenticated) by europa.janwieck.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h7G4SjH20874; Sat, 16 Aug 2003 00:28:46 -0400 Message-ID: <3F3DB2AD.40308@Yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 00:27:25 -0400 From: Jan Wieck Organization: Unorganized User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bruce Momjian Cc: Tom Lane , Stephan Szabo , Christopher Kings-Lynne , Peter Childs , PostgreSQL-development Subject: Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta References: <200308152217.h7FMHX317638@candle.pha.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <200308152217.h7FMHX317638@candle.pha.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200308/832 X-Sequence-Number: 42489 Bruce Momjian wrote: > Is there a TODO here? Maybe!? It's one of these premature things noone can tell by now. So the TODO would be "investigation" for now. Jan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Tom Lane wrote: >> Jan Wieck writes: >> > I'm thinking instead of a way to "cache" entire executors for this. Each >> > SPI plan used during a transaction would need it's own executor, and I >> > don't know offhand what type and how much resources an executor requires >> > (I think it's only some memory that get's initialized and the VFD's >> > opened). >> >> Hmm. This is probably more feasible now than it would have been a year >> ago, because I did some cleanup work to ensure that executor state is >> localized into a specific memory context. I'm not certain about the >> amount of overhead either, but it's surely worth a try. >> >> regards, tom lane >> > -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #