Re: why no stored procedures?
От | Joe Conway |
---|---|
Тема | Re: why no stored procedures? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 007101c125a5$f348f180$48d210ac@jecw2k1 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: why no stored procedures? (roypgsqlgen@xemaps.com) |
Список | pgsql-general |
> roypgsqlgen@xemaps.com writes: > > > From what I understand, postgresql does not have any of this available to > > it. It has procedural languages available to it, but not 'stored > > procedures'. Functions are fine, but only being able to return one > > parameter is going to hurt performance since I will have to run more select > > statements from the client side to get any other info that my function might > > have changed. Plus, from what I read, functions aren't compiled ahead of > > time either. > > The "functions returning resultsets" problem is definitely being > looked at. I'm not sure what the status is. > > Also, whether functions are compiled and cached depends on the > procedural language in question. PL/pgSQL definitely does this > (caches a parse tree of the function). I don't think PL/TCL does, > but I'm not sure. PL/pgSQL also caches query plans automatically, and > PL/TCL has support for doing it explicitly. > PostgreSQL also supports compiled C functions. This feature has significant performance advantages over run-of-the-mill stored procedures. -- Joe
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: