Re: [JDBC] Query much slower when run from postgres function - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Andreas Wenk
Subject Re: [JDBC] Query much slower when run from postgres function
Date
Msg-id 49B554F8.7090603@netzmeister-st-pauli.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [JDBC] Query much slower when run from postgres function  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-performance
Tom Lane schrieb:
> Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com> writes:
>> Unnamed prepared statements are planned after binding the values,
>> starting with 8.3, or more precisely starting with 8.3.2 as early 8.3
>> versions were partially broken on this behalf.
>
> No, 8.2 did it too (otherwise we wouldn't have considered 8.3.0 to be
> broken...).  The thing I'm not too clear about is what "use of an
> unnamed statement" translates to for a JDBC user.
>
>             regards, tom lane
>
I followed another post in the PHP List. Andrew McMillan was talking
about his experiences with udf's in Oracle and PG (--> look for subject:
Re: [PHP] pl/php for windows). He was writing that, by using udf's, the
planner sometimes uses strange and not performant plans. So generally I
understood that using udf's is a good idea - compared with the work I
have to do when I code that e.g in PHP and also compared to the better
resulting performance with udf's. So what is your experience with using
udf's (plpgsql)? Is there something like "use it in this case but not in
that case"?

Your answers are very welcome ...

Cheers

Andy



pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [JDBC] Query much slower when run from postgres function
Next
From: Mario Splivalo
Date:
Subject: Re: Query much slower when run from postgres function