Re: [PERFORM] View vs function

2005-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Bruno Wolff III wrote: >> Functions are just black boxes to the planner. > ... unless the function is a SQL function that is trivial enough for the > planner to inline it into the plan of the invoking query. Currently, we > won't inline set-returning SQL

Re: [PERFORM] View vs function

2005-03-20 Thread Neil Conway
Bruno Wolff III wrote: Functions are just black boxes to the planner. ... unless the function is a SQL function that is trivial enough for the planner to inline it into the plan of the invoking query. Currently, we won't inline set-returning SQL functions that are used in the query's rangetable,

Re: [PERFORM] View vs function

2005-03-20 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 22:39:57 -0500, Keith Worthington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi All, > > I have been reading about set returning functions. What I would like to > know is is there a performance advantage in using SRFs versus querying a > view. Assuming the underlying SQL is the sam

[PERFORM] View vs function

2005-03-20 Thread Keith Worthington
Hi All, I have been reading about set returning functions. What I would like to know is is there a performance advantage in using SRFs versus querying a view. Assuming the underlying SQL is the same for the view vs the function except for the WHERE clause which of these would you expect to be