On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Justin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That comment was not meant to be an insult or disparaging in any way what > so ever. If it was taken as such then i'm sorry.
I am sure it would have been fine in person, I just think over email it sounded abrasive. But could you stop topquoting please? > It seems the biggest performance hit is copying of the array content from > one memory variable to another which is happening allot. Yeah, I think arrays just can't handle a whole lot of data, that is all. They are "tricky", and shouldn't be used for heavy lifting (more than 1k of elements feels like you are asking for trouble). > I'm not really against using a temp tables to hold onto values. I used to > do that in Foxpro when i hit the hard limit on its array but other problems > start popping up. If we use a temp table keeping track what going with > other users can make life fun. I think temp tables have scope, though you should test this, so that you can use them with impunity in functions and not worry with multiple users. > I really want to figure this out how to speed it up. I have to write allot > more aggregate functions to analyze R&D data which will happen latter this > year. right now this function will be used in calculating manufacturing > cost. I think a combination of aggregate functions along with some more design would be best. For example: can you have a trigger calculate the normalized weight of a row on insert? Have triggers keep another table with summary information updated as you modify the data? Etc. There is a lot to PG that would help for this kind of thing. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
