On 5/26/10 9:47 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Eliot Gable (egable+pgsql-performa...@gmail.com) wrote:
Since PostgreSQL is written in C, I assume there is no
such additional overhead. I assume that the PL/PGSQL implementation at its
heart also uses SPI to perform those executions. Is that a fair statement?
Right, but I also wouldn't expect a huge improvment either, unless
you're calling these queries a ton, or the queries that you're calling
from the pl/pgsql are pretty short-lived.
Don't get me wrong, C is going to be faster, but it depends on exactly
what's going on as to if it's going to be an overall improvment of, say,
10%, or a 10-fold improvment. :)
Or a 0.1% improvement, which is more likely. Or that the PL/PGSQL version is
even faster than the C version, because if you do any string regexp in your
function, Perl has extremely efficient algorithms, probably better than you
have time to write in C.
We use Perl extensively and have never had any complaints. The database
activity completely dominates all queries, and the performance of Perl has
never even been noticable.
We use a C functions for a few things, and it is a big nuisance. Every time
you upgrade Postgres or your OS, there's a chance the recompile will fail
because of changed header files. Any bugs in your code crash Postgres itself.
We avoid C as much as possible (and I love C, been doing it since 1984).
Craig
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
