Re: libpq vs ODBC

From: "Pierre C" <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com>
To: "Divakar Singh" <dpsmails(at)yahoo(dot)com>, "Alex Goncharov" <alex-goncharov(at)comcast(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: libpq vs ODBC
Date: 2010-12-10 02:32:24
Message-ID: op.vng70ayxeorkce@apollo13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Thu, 09 Dec 2010 06:51:26 +0100, Alex Goncharov
<alex-goncharov(at)comcast(dot)net> wrote:

> ,--- You/Divakar (Wed, 8 Dec 2010 21:17:22 -0800 (PST)) ----*
> | So it means there will be visible impact if the nature of DB
> interaction is DB
> | insert/select. We do that mostly in my app.
>
> You can't say a "visible impact" unless you can measure it in your
> specific application.
>
> Let's say ODBC takes 10 times of .001 sec for libpq. Is this a
> "visible impact"?

Well you have to consider server and client resources separately. If you
waste a bit of CPU time on the client by using a suboptimal driver, that
may be a problem, or not. It you waste server resources, that is much more
likely to be a problem, because it is multiplied by the number of clients.
I don't know about the specifics of ODBC performance, but for instance
php's PDO driver's handling of prepared statements with postgres comes up
as an example of what not to do.

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message alan bryan 2010-12-10 06:38:00 Re: Hardware recommendations
Previous Message John W Strange 2010-12-10 01:57:17 Re: Hardware recommendations