On Tue, 2003-03-18 at 19:00, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > The question here is do we want to offer a half-baked solution,
> > > recognizing that it's some improvement over no solution at all?
> > > Or
On Wednesday 19 March 2003 04:33 am, you wrote:
> Dave Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Tue, 2003-03-18 at 19:00, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> >> ODBC(maybe JDBC also) has cross-transaction result sets
> >> (rather than cursors) since long by simply holding all
> >> results for a query at client
On Tue, 2003-03-18 at 19:00, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > The question here is do we want to offer a half-baked solution,
> > > recognizing that it's some improvement over no solution at all?
> > > Or
Neil Conway writes:
> I'm currently planning to implement (1), as it is sufficient for the
> immediate need that I'm facing.
What need are you facing, and why is it not sufficient to explicitly store
the query results in a temporary table?
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why don't you like (1)? It seems fine to me, and I don't see how we are
> magically going to do any better in the future.
The restrictions of (1) seem pretty obvious to me ... but I don't
see any prospect of doing better in the near future, either.
Cros
I think (1) is fine. When I used Informix, we did lots of huge cursors
that we pulled from for reports, and they consumed huge amounts of RAM
before we could do a fetch --- and we expected that. It doesn't seem
worth adding complexity to avoid that, especially since even if (2) was
done, there w
On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 10:26:07PM -0500, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-03-17 at 22:01, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > What about opening a pseudo-transaction that exists only to serve the
> > cursor?
>
> What exactly do you mean by a pseudo-transaction?
Assign an xid, create the transaction (crea
On Mon, 2003-03-17 at 22:01, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> What about opening a pseudo-transaction that exists only to serve the
> cursor?
What exactly do you mean by a pseudo-transaction?
Keep in mind we don't have nested transactions (yet?), and that the
holdable cursor needs to be accessible both in
On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 09:48:34PM -0500, Neil Conway wrote:
> (2) Use MVCC to ensure that the snapshot of the database that the
> transaction had is still valid, even after the transaction itself has
> committed.
What about opening a pseudo-transaction that exists only to serve the
cursor? Tha
