On 12/19/05 10:49 PM, Mark D. Anderson wrote: > 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.
Have you benched it recently? > It seems consistent with the RDBO benchmark results, where the cases where > fetchall_arrayref are used (simple iteration), the disparity is greatest. Cases where fetchall_arrayref() is used by what? By the plain DBI tests? > 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? Loader just automates what you could have done manually. if you're asking whether or not RDBO can (or should) use pseudo hashes, the answer on both counts is "no", IMO. -John ------------------------------------------------------- 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
