From: | Doug McNaught <doug(at)wireboard(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Culley Harrelson" <Culley_Harrelson(at)pgn(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: DBD::Pg vs Pg.pm |
Date: | 2001-11-15 01:27:09 |
Message-ID: | m3zo5oddsi.fsf@belphigor.mcnaught.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Culley Harrelson" <Culley_Harrelson(at)pgn(dot)com> writes:
> Are there any significance performance differences between DBD::Pg and going
> directly to Pg.pm. I wasn't even aware that there was a difference till I
> recently... The interface difference between the two are drastic.
I wouldn't imagine that there's much of a difference. The main
advantage of the DBD module is that it fits into the DBI framework
which uses a common interface for many different databases. So if you
had a Perl script using a proprietary database through DBI, you could
convert it fairly easily to use Postgres (depending on how much
non-standard SQL and server-side stuff you were doing).
DBI is the "recommended" way to use databases from Perl but Pg.pm
works fine AFIAK.
-Doug
--
Let us cross over the river, and rest under the shade of the trees.
--T. J. Jackson, 1863
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2001-11-15 01:33:15 | Re: Sourceforge on Oracle? |
Previous Message | Risko Peter | 2001-11-15 01:15:54 | Re: index on numbers not honoured |