Re: memory optimization

From: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: Sabin Coanda <sabin(dot)coanda(at)deuromedia(dot)ro>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: memory optimization
Date: 2007-08-15 18:15:00
Message-ID: 20070815181500.GN54135@nasby.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 10:21:31AM +0300, Sabin Coanda wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I have a procedure which uses temporary objects (table and sequence). I
> tried to optimize it, using common variables (array and long varchar)
> instead. I didn't found any difference in performance, but I'd like to
> choose the best option from other points of view. One of them is the memory.
>
> So, what is better from the postgres memory point of view: to use temporary
> objects, or to use common variables ?

A temp table might take *slightly* more room than variables...

> Can you suggest me other point of views to be taken into consideration in my
> case ?

Code maintenance. I can't think of anyway to replace a temp table with
variables that isn't a complete nightmare.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Decibel! 2007-08-15 18:24:24 Re: Interpreting statistics collector output
Previous Message D. Dante Lorenso 2007-08-15 18:09:12 SELECT ... FOR UPDATE performance costs? alternatives?