Re: updated qCache - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Karel Zak
Subject Re: updated qCache
Date
Msg-id 20020418105518.B13923@zf.jcu.cz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: updated qCache  (Neil Conway <nconway@klamath.dyndns.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 06:05:59PM -0400, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:34:45 -0700
> 
> I'm not saying it's a bad idea, I just think I'd like to
> concentrate on the locally-cached plans for now and see if
> there is a need to add shared plans later.
Yes, later we can use shared memory buffer as "pipe" betweenbackends:
Backend A:                            Backend B:local-memory-query-plan --> shmem --> local-memory-query-planIn this
ideais in the shared memory one query-plan only and backends use it for plan copying from "A" to "B".
 
It require persistent backends of course.
       Karel
PS. it's idea only and nothing other, the original qcache was idea    only too :-)
-- Karel Zak  <zakkr@zf.jcu.cz>http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/C, PostgreSQL, PHP, WWW, http://docs.linux.cz,
http://mape.jcu.cz


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: tycho@fruru.com
Date:
Subject: Re: Index Scans become Seq Scans after VACUUM ANALYSE
Next
From: Michael Loftis
Date:
Subject: Re: timeout implementation issues