Re: Functions in Postgres

From: Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Gordon Clarke <gordonc(at)adf-serials(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Functions in Postgres
Date: 2002-04-12 19:12:01
Message-ID: 200204121912.g3CJC1007563@saturn.janwieck.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

Tom Lane wrote:
> Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Not since about Tcl 8.0.
>
> > You're right, not Tcl's fault. Noone changed PL/Tcl to use it
> > though. It still does Tcl_CreateCommand(), which is the
> > backward compatibility pure string interface wrapping
> > technology. :-)
>
> I could be mistaken, but I thought Tcl would still reduce the function
> text to bytecode behind-the-scenes.
>
> We are losing with unnecessary text conversions in a number of places in
> pltcl, but I think it's just in parameter passing at pltcl function
> entry/exit and calls to the special Tcl commands provided by pltcl.
> If you're executing regular Tcl commands inside a pltcl function,
> I think you still will get benefit from Tcl 8's speedups.

Absolutely. It's only all the SPI_* crap and parameter/result
conversion. Inside Tcl it's calm like in the center of a
hurricane, the problem is just getting in and out...

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message cnliou 2002-04-13 01:16:43 Re: Problem With A Rule (clear version)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-04-12 18:58:11 Re: Functions in Postgres