I think many of use realize what a pig dog fetch*_hashref is relative
to fetch*_arrayref.

I don't know if things have improved in the past few years, but about
three years ago I had to tune some bulk loading of a perl object cache
from an RDBMS, and found that fetchrow_arrayref was about 5 times
faster. I also found that if I implemented the semantics of
fetchrow_hashref
myself, it was twice as fast as whatever it is DBI is doing.

Treat all this as qualitative anecdotes of a distant memory, but I'd
be surprised if others' experiences were that different.
It seems consistent with the RDBO benchmark results, where the cases
where
fetchall_arrayref are used (simple iteration), the disparity is
greatest.

Is it really the case that use of fetchrow_arrayref has to
interfere with the  programmer interface?
In particular, is there some way for Rose::DB::Object::Loader
to do whatever mysto-spooko magic that "use fields" offers?

-mda


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
Rose-db-object mailing list
Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object

Reply via email to