Re: eWeek Poll: Which database is most critical to your
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
To: "Neil Conway" <nconway@klamath.dyndns.org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2002-02-27T06:50:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> According to MySQL: "The query cache is extremely useful in an > environment where (some) tables don't change very often and you have a > lot of identical queries. This is a typical situation for many web > servers that use a lot of dynamic content." > > Would people agree with the MySQL guys on this? In particular, that this > is a "typical situation" for many webapps? Hmmm. We have a lot of repeated _parameterised_ queries, but the recurrence of identical queries is quite small. It'd be an interesting thing to try and measure. > > Now, there are notions of "prepared statements" in many access APIs > > that fit this description, and in fact the underlying capability exists > > in the backend --- we've just not gotten around to building the > > interfaces to tie it all together. *That* would be worth working on. > > Okay, I'll take a look at this... This is the more general solution, compared to MySQL's query cache - and can speed up paramaterised queries as well as identical queries... Chris