Re: another performance question.

2001-08-27 Thread Tim Bunce
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 09:38:55PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote: So what I don't understand is what how bind_columns is dereferencing this in such a manner as to allow me to refer to the columns as scalars WITHOUT showing seeming to show any overhead. The magic of aliasing. Watch:

RE: another performance question.

2001-08-27 Thread Steve Howard
: another performance question. On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 09:38:55PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote: So what I don't understand is what how bind_columns is dereferencing this in such a manner as to allow me to refer to the columns as scalars WITHOUT showing seeming to show any overhead. The magic

Re: another performance question.

2001-08-26 Thread lembark
-- Steve Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 08/26/01 10:08:23 -0500 dereferencing in the code (is there no overhead to the binding of columns?). Binding uses pre-allocated space to return the result and is usually faster. fetch_blah calls have to allocate space for the result, which is what

RE: another performance question.

2001-08-26 Thread Steve Howard
; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: another performance question. -- Steve Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 08/26/01 10:08:23 -0500 dereferencing in the code (is there no overhead to the binding of columns?). Binding uses pre-allocated space to return the result and is usually faster. fetch_blah

Re: another performance question.

2001-08-26 Thread Tim Bunce
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 02:59:28PM -0500, Steve Howard wrote: Not the case in this question. What is being returned is the reference - values other than a single reference are not being copied. This is how fetchrow_arrayref works as well - only a reference to the array is returned, but when