| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: On the performance of views |
| Date: | 2004-01-26 16:43:37 |
| Message-ID: | 8197.1075135417@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance pgsql-sql |
Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com> writes:
> At first I was going to just convert all MSSQL procedures to Postgres functions.
> But now that I'm looking at it, a lot of them may be candidates for views. A
> lot of them take on the format of:
> SELECT a.cola, b.colb, c.colc
> FROM a JOIN b JOIN c
> WHERE a.prikey=$1
You'd probably be better off using views, if making that significant a
notational change is feasible for you. Functions that return multiple
columns are notationally messy in Postgres. A view-based solution would
be more flexible and likely have better performance.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-01-26 17:09:41 | Re: On the performance of views |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2004-01-26 16:16:28 | Re: High Performance/High Reliability File system on SuSE64 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-01-26 17:09:41 | Re: On the performance of views |
| Previous Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2004-01-26 15:29:46 | Re: On the performance of views |