On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:05 AM, Andrew Gierth
wrote:
>> "Euler" == Euler Taveira de Oliveira writes:
>
> Euler> Ops... forgot to remove it from other test. It seems much
> Euler> better but far from the ideal. :( I've never taken a look at
> Euler> the pl/pgsql code but it could be nice i
> "Euler" == Euler Taveira de Oliveira writes:
Euler> Ops... forgot to remove it from other test. It seems much
Euler> better but far from the ideal. :( I've never taken a look at
Euler> the pl/pgsql code but it could be nice if there would be two
Euler> path codes: access-data and non-ac
2009/9/24 Euler Taveira de Oliveira :
> Hi,
>
> I recently saw a complaint that a simple PL/PgSQL code is slower than PL/SQL.
> I did some benchmark and confirmed it is. I coded the same function
> (function2) in C just to compare with something. According to OP [1], the
> PL/SQL seems to run more
Tom Lane escreveu:
> FWIW, the high showing of AllocSetReset in your profile suggests to me
> that you're timing an assert-enabled build, which wouldn't exactly be
> a fair comparison to an Oracle production build anyhow.
>
Ops... forgot to remove it from other test. It seems much better but far f
Euler Taveira de Oliveira writes:
> I recently saw a complaint that a simple PL/PgSQL code is slower than PL/SQL.
> I did some benchmark and confirmed it is. I coded the same function
> (function2) in C just to compare with something. According to OP [1], the
> PL/SQL seems to run more than 15x fa
