Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > I think what we should do is either (1) implement a poor man's caching > that doesn't try to cope with any of these issues, and document that > you get what you pay for or (2) reject this idea in its entirety. > Trying to reimplement all of our normal function call semantics in a > caching layer does not seem very sane.
What about (3) implementing the caching layer in the core code so that any caller benefit from it? I guess the size of the project is not the same though. Regards, -- dim -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
