On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Bill Moran wrote:
> johnn wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 12:42:04PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
> >
> >>4) It simply isn't practical to expect a single query to
> >> execute on multiple processors simultaneously.
> >>
> >>Do you know of any RDBMS that actually will exec
h same args.
^^
... ok, mabe i should say "constant args" as in doc.
Anyway, thank you for attention and willing to help.
regards, andriy tkachuk (http://imt.com.ua)
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> Andriy Tkachuk wr
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> Andriy Tkachuk wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Andriy Tkachuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >>>At second. calc_total() is immutable function:
> >>&g
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andriy Tkachuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > At second. calc_total() is immutable function:
> > but it seems that it's not cached in one session:
>
> It's not supposed to be.
but it's written id doc:
QUERY PLAN
--
Result (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=0.00..0.00 rows=1 loops=1)
Total runtime: 0.02 msec
(2 rows)
What i miss?
Thanks,
Andriy Tkachuk
http://www.imt.com.ua
---(end of broadcast)--
vious realization of calc_total() on pl/tcl. I
use there spi_exec - so the query always regards as dynamic - it
always parsed, rewritten, planned but executes fastest much more
:)
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> Andriy Tkachuk wrote:
>
> > Hi folks.
> >
> > W
R (user_id = 6916799)) AND (dat >=
1062363600) AND (dat < 1064955599))
Total runtime: 101.14 msec
^^
So the query is the same as in calc_total(usr,d1,d2) function,
but execute time extremely differs.
Is it normal?
Thanks,
Andriy Tkachuk.
