On 3 April 2016 at 12:18, Igal @ Lucee.org <i...@lucee.org> wrote: > On 4/3/2016 8:21 AM, Dave Cramer wrote: > > > On 9 March 2016 at 20:49, Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> On 3/8/2016 5:12 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: >> >>> >>> Are there good reasons to use pgjdbc over pgjdbc-ng then? >>> >>> >> Maturity, support for older versions (-ng just punts on support for >> anything except new releases) and older JDBC specs, completeness of support >> for some extensions. TBH I haven't done a ton with -ng yet. >> >> > I'd like to turn this question around. Are there good reasons to use -ng > over pgjdbc ? > > As to your question, you may be interested to know that pgjdbc is more > performant than ng. > > That's good to know, but unfortunately pgjdbc is unusable for us until > https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/488 is fixed. > > Also, as I mentioned in the ticket, I can't imagine RETURNING * being > performant if, for example, I INSERT a large chunk of data like an image > data or an uploaded file. > > > Thanks for the reminder!
So I"m guessing the reason to use ng is to avoid returning * ? Dave Cramer da...@postgresintl.com www.postgresintl.com > Igal > >
