From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, SF Postgres <sfpug(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Cool PL/PgSQL hack :) |
Date: | 2003-05-30 03:52:14 |
Message-ID: | 200305292052.14580.josh@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | sfpug |
David, David:
> BTW, I'm doing a few similar things like a string_split that returns
> an array, and eventually--don't know quite how hard this is--similar
> operations with one-column SELECTs instead of arrays. Am I
> reinventing the wheel here?
Yah. Joe Conway is adding a whole battery of array-processing functions to
7.4; if you're patient, you can have them for free.
> > That said, I'm slowly moving things over to compiled .so's which is
> > significantly faster, but this had me wondering: has anyone done any
> > comparative benchmarks of the various pl languages for PostgreSQL?
Not PL/ vs. PL/, but PL/pgSQL vs. compiled .so in a trigger procedure yielded
about a 60% reduction in execution time.
If I'm working on something extremely performance sensitive, I usually hire
someone to re-write my PL/pgSQL in C. Otherwise, I go for what each language
is good at:
PL/pgSQL for record manipulation;
PL/Perl for text manipulation;
PL/R for aggregates
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sean Chittenden | 2003-05-30 06:08:34 | Re: Cool PL/PgSQL hack :) |
Previous Message | elein | 2003-05-30 01:19:10 | Re: Cool PL/PgSQL hack :) |