| From: | Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alban Hertroys <alban(at)magproductions(dot)nl> |
| Cc: | "Joseph M(dot) Day" <jday(at)gisolutions(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Temporary Tables |
| Date: | 2005-04-01 15:56:45 |
| Message-ID: | 1112371004.13798.30.camel@state.g2switchworks.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 04:32, Alban Hertroys wrote:
> Joseph M. Day wrote:
> > Just out of curiosity, what is the performance of this? In MSSQL the
> > only way to do something equivalent to this was to use a cursor. Cursors
> > are painfully slow, so they are to be used as a last resort.
>
> On what do you base that cursors are slow?
I'm guessing that in MSSQL, cursors are slow, so the original poster
simply assumed that on all other databases, cursors are slow.
I can assure him that in PostgreSQL they are not any slower than any
other method of accessing data i've used, and usually faster.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Karl O. Pinc | 2005-04-01 16:19:55 | Best practices for (plpgsql ?) trigger optimization? |
| Previous Message | Chandra Sekhar Surapaneni | 2005-04-01 15:54:09 | Re: Help with converting hexadecimal to decimal |