From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Arun Desai <Arundesai(at)kinera(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-jdbc-list <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Number of function parameter |
Date: | 2003-07-21 18:10:33 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0307211208290.16214-100000@css120.ihs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Arun Desai wrote:
> Hi,
> Why is that there is a maximum limit of 32 input parameters to the
> Postgresql function?
>
>
> Whereas to my knowledge stored procedures in Oracle and SQL Server
> take unlimited number of input arguments. So this puts extra burden on the
> middleware developer to handle this stiuation at the time of migrating
> existing databases in SQL Server or Oracle to Postgresql.
Just remember, TANSTAAFL (There ain't no such thing as a free lunch)
in some way, you're paying for a limited or unlimited number of args, be
it money, performance, flexibility. for postgresql, the payment is that
it gets pretty good performance on <=32 args, without a bunch of ugly code
to handle "unlimited" args. note that there's still a limit, even in
Oracle, it's likely a performance enforced limit though, i.e. after 1024
args the functions get so slow as to be unusable.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Paul Thomas | 2003-07-21 18:24:43 | Re: IN clauses via setObject(Collection) [Was: Re: Prepare |
Previous Message | Dmitry Tkach | 2003-07-21 17:55:41 | Re: IN clauses via setObject(Collection) [Was: Re: Prepared |