X-Original-To: pgsql-jdbc-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C38B9D1B1D0 for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2004 18:47:09 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 23405-06 for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2004 21:47:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail63.csoft.net (unknown [63.111.22.74]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8EECAD1B18E for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2004 18:47:01 -0300 (ADT) Received: (qmail 1861 invoked by uid 1112); 18 Jun 2004 21:47:01 -0000 Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 16:47:01 -0500 (EST) From: Kris Jurka X-X-Sender: books@leary.csoft.net To: Jie Liang Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org, pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Prepare Statement In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200406/102 X-Sequence-Number: 10304 On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Jie Liang wrote: > However, I am still thinking if I call one SELECT and one DELECT and one > UPDATE and one INSERT a thousand times against same table with different > arguments, should I consider performance iusse? Right, this is a case where some benefits can be found, but remember the premature optimization adage. > > Secondly, I assume the function should be a pre-compiled object stored > on server side, doesn't it. > I depends on the language the function is written. plpgsql caches plans, but not all procedural languages do. Kris Jurka