From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tim Uckun <timuckun(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Shared Constants in PLPGSQL |
Date: | 2017-08-01 18:54:17 |
Message-ID: | CAHyXU0yH10Wga6ebtNvsUotKbMRbUueAx5S856Jr7VahJs3QpA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 8:29 AM, Tim Uckun <timuckun(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> In my case I don't expect these constants to be changed on a regular basis.
> They will be set just once and that's it. I was thinking it would be just as
> easy to set them in a proc as it would be to set them in a table. By putting
> them in an immutable proc I can hopefully save a couple of compute cycles.
Sure. The point is, by having a proc return a table based composite
type, you can simplify changes down the line. Adding a new setting
can be done via ALTER. Changing a setting (should it become
necessary) can be done with an UPDATE. The immutable wrapping
function does eliminate some fetches and I would generally write that
wrapper.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2017-08-01 20:17:13 | Re: Perfomance of IN-clause with many elements and possible solutions |
Previous Message | Dan Cooperstock at Software4Nonprofits | 2017-08-01 18:35:11 | Re: Problem compiling a C function on Windows - not finding _palloc0@4 |