| From: | Chris Bitmead <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | chris(at)bitmead(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Another nasty cache problem |
| Date: | 2000-02-04 05:57:54 |
| Message-ID: | 389A6A62.7A6BD39C@nimrod.itg.telecom.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Chris Bitmead <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> > What about portals? Doesn't psql use portals?
>
> No ... portals are a backend concept ...
Since when?
According to the old doco you do...
select portal XX * from table_name where ...;
fetch 20 into XX.
If the PQexec() is called with "fetch 20" at a time
wouldn't this mean that you wouldn't exhaust front-end
memory with a big query?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-02-04 06:06:53 | Re: [HACKERS] how to deal with sparse/to-be populated tables |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-02-04 05:42:58 | Re: [HACKERS] Another nasty cache problem |