| From: | Tim Uckun <timuckun(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Mike Sofen <msofen(at)runbox(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Performance PLV8 vs PLPGSQL |
| Date: | 2016-12-29 09:03:20 |
| Message-ID: | CAGuHJrOMZ9oZjWRagCS4vuK32DkR_Y-jckOW1re8WBDQP_gFrg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
I think it's awesome that postgres allows you to code in different
languages like this. It really is a unique development environment and one
that is overlooked as a development platform. It would be nice if more
languages were delivered in the default package especially lua, V8 and
mruby.
On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> My recommendation. See them as tools in a toolkit, not a question of what
> is best.
>
> For places where you have SQL statements as primary do SQL or PLPGSQL
> functions.
>
> For places where you are manipulating values (parsing strings for example)
> use something else (I usually use pl/perl for string manipulation but ymmv).
>
> PLPGSQL works best where you have a large query and some procedurally
> supporting logic. It becomes a lot less usable, performant, and
> maintainable the further you get away from that.
>
> So there is no best just different tools in a toolkit.
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tim Uckun | 2016-12-29 09:04:06 | Re: Performance PLV8 vs PLPGSQL |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2016-12-29 09:00:49 | Re: Performance PLV8 vs PLPGSQL |