| From: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Martin Gainty" <mgainty(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Bill Moran" <wmoran(at)collaborativefusion(dot)com>, "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Postgres General List" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Oracle and Postgresql |
| Date: | 2008-09-15 21:24:40 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150809151424u3b6f92fene1d61ae3fb2a760e@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-www |
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Martin Gainty <mgainty(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
> accessing:
> i *thought* the advantage of creating any SQL procedure/function was the
> entity is stored in procedure cache
> load time:
> Java vs C++ compare here
> http://www.idiom.com/~zilla/Computer/javaCbenchmark.html
This is completely off topic as it is, but I can't help it: anyone who
is arguing that Java is faster than C must be oblivious to the fact
that Java internals are *written in C*. If Java was really faster
than C, it would be self hosting, and we would be writing operating
systems, databases, and various other systems level stuff in Java.
(yes, there are a few well known projects, notably lucene, but that's
the exception rather than the rule).
Anybody making the case that Java is faster than C simply doesn't know
how a computer works.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matt Magoffin | 2008-09-15 21:28:09 | Re: Out of memory on SELECT (from sort?) in 8.3 |
| Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2008-09-15 20:36:16 | Re: Pg 8.3 tuning recommendations for embedded low-memory device (for OLPC :-) ) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christophe | 2008-09-15 21:29:37 | Re: Oracle and Postgresql |
| Previous Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2008-09-15 20:28:02 | Re: Oracle and Postgresql |