On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Marko Kreen <mark...@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> Mm.  I still think we should drop it, because it's still a dangerous API
>>> that's not necessary for the principal benefit of this feature.
>> Yes, it is a secondary feature, but it fits the needs of the actual target
>> audience of the single-row feature - various high-level wrappers of libpq.
>> Also it is needed for high-performance situations, where the
>> single-row-mode fits well even for C clients, except the
>> advantage is negated by new malloc-per-row overhead.
> Absolutely no evidence has been presented that there's any useful
> performance gain to be had there.  Moreover, if there were, we could
> probably work a bit harder at making PGresult creation cheaper, rather
> than having to expose a dangerous API.

Ok, I'm more interested in primary feature,
so no more objections from me.


Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to