X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6AE09DCA39 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:35:15 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 76094-10 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:35:12 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from noel.decibel.org (noel.decibel.org [67.100.216.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDF379DC809 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:35:08 -0400 (AST) Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id AB0B539846; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:34:55 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:34:55 -0600 From: "Jim C. Nasby" To: Rikard Pavelic Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORMANCE] Stored Procedures Message-ID: <20060120213455.GT20182@pervasive.com> References: <43D130EF.3010205@zg.htnet.hr> <20060120191031.GO20182@pervasive.com> <43D13C2F.1030203@zg.htnet.hr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <43D13C2F.1030203@zg.htnet.hr> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE amd64 X-Distributed: Join the Effort! http://www.distributed.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.099 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.099] X-Spam-Score: 0.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200601/363 X-Sequence-Number: 16841 On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 08:38:23PM +0100, Rikard Pavelic wrote: > This would solve problems with prepare which is per session, so for > prepared function to be > optimal one must use same connection. If you're dealing with something that's performance critical you're not going to be constantly re-connecting anyway, so I don't see what the issue is. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461