Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7A2C633C61; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 14:16:40 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 51711-07; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 14:16:37 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3070B633B1E; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 14:16:39 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n29HGYWd005166; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 13:16:34 -0400 (EDT) To: Guillaume Smet cc: Guillaume Cottenceau , Mario Splivalo , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Query much slower when run from postgres function In-reply-to: <1d4e0c10903091004m758d7ea2s91e33631be81215a@mail.gmail.com> References: <49B51B60.6030600@megafon.hr> <27649.1236616294@sss.pgh.pa.us> <87fxhmmygj.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan> <1d4e0c10903091004m758d7ea2s91e33631be81215a@mail.gmail.com> Comments: In-reply-to Guillaume Smet message dated "Mon, 09 Mar 2009 18:04:23 +0100" Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 13:16:34 -0400 Message-ID: <5165.1236618994@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200903/30 X-Sequence-Number: 19360 Guillaume Smet writes: > Unnamed prepared statements are planned after binding the values, > starting with 8.3, or more precisely starting with 8.3.2 as early 8.3 > versions were partially broken on this behalf. No, 8.2 did it too (otherwise we wouldn't have considered 8.3.0 to be broken...). The thing I'm not too clear about is what "use of an unnamed statement" translates to for a JDBC user. regards, tom lane