From: Alex Goncharov
Subject: Re: libpq vs ODBC
Date: ,
Msg-id: E1PQZPa-0000yV-Pd@hanssachs.home
(view: Whole thread, Raw)
In response to: Re: libpq vs ODBC  (Divakar Singh)
Responses: Re: libpq vs ODBC  (Divakar Singh)
Re: libpq vs ODBC  ("Pierre C")
List: pgsql-performance

Tree view

libpq vs ODBC  (Divakar Singh, )
 Re: libpq vs ODBC  (Alex Goncharov, )
  Re: libpq vs ODBC  (Divakar Singh, )
   Re: libpq vs ODBC  (Alex Goncharov, )
    Re: libpq vs ODBC  (Divakar Singh, )
     Re: libpq vs ODBC  (Pavel Stehule, )
    Re: libpq vs ODBC  ("Pierre C", )

,--- You/Divakar (Wed, 8 Dec 2010 21:17:22 -0800 (PST)) ----*
| So it means there will be visible impact if the nature of DB interaction is DB
| insert/select. We do that mostly in my app.

You can't say a "visible impact" unless you can measure it in your
specific application.

Let's say ODBC takes 10 times of .001 sec for libpq.  Is this a
"visible impact"?

| Performance difference would be negligible if the query is server intensive
| where execution time is far more than time taken by e.g. communication interface
| or transaction handling.
| Am I right?

You've got to measure -- there are too many variables to give you the
answer you are trying to get.

To a different question, "Would I use ODBC to work with PostgreSQL if
I had the option of using libpq?", I'd certainly answer, "No".

You'd need to have the option of using libpq, though.  ODBC takes care
of a lot of difficult details for you, and libpq's higher performance
may turn out to be a loss for you, in your specific situation.

-- Alex --  --



pgsql-performance by date:

From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: libpq vs ODBC
From: Marti Raudsepp
Date:
Subject: Re: Hardware recommendations