Re: function returning setof performance question

Thanks for the reply.

I was hoping to eliminate the parse call on the view because I was doing
the where clause on the view instead of putting the where in the view.
In all, I was hoping to keep a single view called from multiple functions
with different where clauses. Yep... I shoulda known better...

Thanks again!

And Rod Taylor (rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca) said...:

> > The performance hit is tiny, we're talking less than 1/2 a second,
> > but when I've done this sort of thing in Oracle I've seen a performance
> > increase, not a decrease.
>
> Thats just plain strange (never tried on Oracle). Why in the world
> would adding the overhead of a function call (with no other changes)
> increase performance?
>
> The function has additional overhead in the form of the plpgsql
> interpreter. You may find a c function will give close to identical
> performance as with the standard view so long as the query is the same.
>
>
> One thing to keep in mind is that the view can be rearranged to give a
> better query overall. The exact work completed for the view may be
> different when called from within a different SQL statement. Most
> functions -- some SQL language based functions are strange this way --
> cannot do this
>

--

Mark Bronnimann
meb(at)speakeasy(dot)net

-- Let's organize this thing and take all the fun out of it. --