Re: Speed of different procedural language
| От | Michael Fuhr |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Speed of different procedural language |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20051221221028.GA60176@winnie.fuhr.org обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Speed of different procedural language ("Steinar H. Gunderson" <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Speed of different procedural language
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:38:10PM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 02:24:42PM -0700, Michael Fuhr wrote: > > The difference is clear only in specific cases; just because you > > saw a 10x increase in some cases doesn't mean you can expect that > > kind of increase, or indeed any increase, in others. I've seen > > PL/pgSQL beat all other PL/* challengers handily many times, > > especially when the function does a lot of querying and looping > > through large result sets. > > That's funny, my biggest problems with PL/PgSQL have been (among others) > exactly with large result sets... Out of curiosity, do you have a simple test case? I'd be interested in seeing what you're doing in PL/pgSQL that's contradicting what I'm seeing. -- Michael Fuhr
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: