From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Vincenzo Romano <vincenzo(dot)romano(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Function call costs for SQL and PLPgSQL |
Date: | 2007-06-22 14:46:22 |
Message-ID: | 22065.1182523582@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Vincenzo Romano <vincenzo(dot)romano(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I need to create a huge SQL script to load 20+ M rows in a DB.
> I've been force to wrap the inserts into PG functions.
> I can write them in either SQl or PLPgSQL but don't know
> whether this can make a big difference as far as time of
> overall execution is concerned.
> Somewhere else I've been told that SQL function bodies get "inlined"
> during execution. Is thus correct to consider SQL functions "faster"
> that the conterpart written in PLPgSQL?
Inlining only applies to simple-SELECT SQL functions (ie, pure
functions). For what you're trying to do, I think plpgsql will
be faster as well as more flexible.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2007-06-22 14:49:55 | Re: How to install Postgresql on MS Vista? |
Previous Message | Vincenzo Romano | 2007-06-22 14:37:11 | Re: [PGSQL 8.2.x] INSERT+INSERT |