| From: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pl/* overhead ... |
| Date: | 2005-10-26 06:55:42 |
| Message-ID: | 20051026065542.GA19386@winnie.fuhr.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-sql |
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 12:58:13AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Does anyone know of, or have, any comparisions of the overhead going with
> something like pl/perl or pl/php vs using pl/pgsql?
Benchmark results will probably depend on the type of processing
you're doing. I'd expect PL/pgSQL to be faster at database operations
like looping through query results, and other languages to be faster
at non-database operations like text munging and number crunching,
depending on the particular language's strengths.
[Does quick test.]
Whale oil beef hooked. PL/pgSQL just outran PL/Perl when I expected
the latter to win. Hang on, let me play with it until it comes back
with the results I want....
--
Michael Fuhr
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-26 07:00:24 | Re: why vacuum |
| Previous Message | Bath, David | 2005-10-26 06:22:40 | Re: why vacuum |