Re: Temp table or normal table for performance?

From: Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail(at)webthatworks(dot)it>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Temp table or normal table for performance?
Date: 2009-08-21 12:23:38
Message-ID: 20090821142338.5b65aff4@dawn.webthatworks.it
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 20 Aug 2009 13:43:10 GMT
Jasen Betts <jasen(at)xnet(dot)co(dot)nz> wrote:

> On 2009-08-19, Stephen Cook <sclists(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Let's say I have a function that needs to collect some data from
> > various tables and process and sort them to be returned to the
> > user.
>
> plpgsql functions don't play well with temp tables IME.

Why?

you mean that since you generally use temp table for computation and
looping several times over the table... a more expressive language
would be suited?

--
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
http://www.webthatworks.it

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz 2009-08-21 13:13:36 Re: Temp table or normal table for performance?
Previous Message David Waller 2009-08-21 12:16:50 "Number of columns exceed limit" on a hierarchy of views