2008/8/6 Giorgio Valoti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On 06/ago/08, at 16:04, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>> 2008/8/6 Giorgio Valoti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>
>>> Hi all, I think I've read somewhere in the documentation that the
>>> invocation
>>> of functions written in procedural languages (with the excepti
On mið, 2008-08-06 at 20:48 +0200, Giorgio Valoti wrote:
> On 06/ago/08, at 16:04, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> >
> > it's depend. Start of interpret is only one overhead.
> > Other is date
> > conversions to language compatible types (without C and plpgsql).
> So is plpgsql slower on date conversio
On 06/ago/08, at 16:04, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2008/8/6 Giorgio Valoti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi all, I think I've read somewhere in the documentation that the
invocation
of functions written in procedural languages (with the exception of
plpgsql)
incur in performance hit due to the call the la
2008/8/6 Giorgio Valoti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi all, I think I've read somewhere in the documentation that the invocation
> of functions written in procedural languages (with the exception of plpgsql)
> incur in performance hit due to the call the language interpreter. Is that
> correct or am I c
pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [GENERAL] Invocation overhead for procedural languages
> Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 14:44:16 +0200
>
> Hi all, I think I’ve read somewhere in the documentation that the
> invocation of functions written in procedural la
Hi all, I think I’ve read somewhere in the documentation that the
invocation of functions written in procedural languages (with the
exception of plpgsql) incur in performance hit due to the call the
language interpreter. Is that correct or am I completely off track?
Thank you in advance
--
