| From: | Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | PgSQL General ML <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Writing most code in Stored Procedures |
| Date: | 2007-08-18 14:56:00 |
| Message-ID: | 46C70880.6020801@cox.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 08/17/07 21:45, Steve Manes wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>>> Moving all the application-bound inserts into stored procedures didn't
>>> achieve nearly the performance enhancement I'd assumed I'd get, which I
>>> figured was due to the overhead of the procs themselves.
>>
>> Would that be because the original app was written in a compiled
>> language, but the SPs in an interpreted language?
>
> No, because the application language was Perl5 for both. I think it was
> just the overhead of 2 million inserts via procs versus 2 million inline
> inserts (without the proc overhead).
Interesting. Does PG have to initiate the Perl interpreter every
time you call a Perl-written SP?
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGxwiAS9HxQb37XmcRAgi2AJ9Yq2drImecZVTbZR0Wo4VKlpaiXwCgpjHo
8KcDWqDpW6BWNWCj+ZUQFU4=
=Qlpg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Johnson | 2007-08-18 14:59:18 | Re: Automating logins for mundane chores |
| Previous Message | Ron Mayer | 2007-08-18 14:55:23 | Re: Transactional DDL |