RE: Large selects handled inefficiently? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Andrew Snow
Subject RE: Large selects handled inefficiently?
Date
Msg-id NHEALMDKDACEIPBNOOOCMEHBCLAA.als@fl.net.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Large selects handled inefficiently?  (Jules Bean <jules@jellybean.co.uk>)
List pgsql-general
> A cursor is another slightly foolish SQL hack.
>
> A query language specifies the syntax of queries ('SELECT ...').  It
> doesn't specify the manner in which these are actually returned.  It
> seems totally within the bounds of the remit of a decent client-side
> library (and a decent back-end) to realise that in practice a client
> will want some control over the speed with which rows are returned.
>
> Whilst explicit cursors are needed for some (IMO ugly) procedural SQL
> code, explicit cursors should not be necessary for the simple (and
> common) task of carrying out a SELECT which takes up more memory than
> you wish to have available at any single time.


Hmm, I agree.  So, does the PostgreSQL protocol support some form of non-SQL
cursor?


- Andrew



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: initdb Error: 'oid8'
Next
From: "Travis Bauer"
Date:
Subject: Error with tcp/ip networking