X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38A7F9DCBD3 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 07:06:49 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 02182-07 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 07:06:50 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from cassarossa.samfundet.no (cassarossa.samfundet.no [129.241.93.19]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76E599DCBC7 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 07:06:46 -0400 (AST) Received: from trofast.ipv6.sesse.net ([2001:700:300:dc03:20e:cff:fe36:a766] helo=trofast.sesse.net) by cassarossa.samfundet.no with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Ep1nz-0004LC-7Q for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:06:47 +0100 Received: from sesse by trofast.sesse.net with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1Ep1nz-0004Y1-00 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:06:47 +0100 Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:06:47 +0100 From: "Steinar H. Gunderson" To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Speed of different procedural language Message-ID: <20051221110647.GA17360@uio.no> Mail-Followup-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.14.3 on a x86_64 X-Message-Flag: Outlook? --> http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.02 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020] X-Spam-Score: 0.02 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/532 X-Sequence-Number: 16353 On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 01:10:21AM -0000, Ben Trewern wrote: > I know I should be writing these in C but that's a bit beyond me. I was > going to try PL/Python or PL/Perl or even PL/Ruby. Has anyone any idea > which language is fastest, or is the data access going to swamp the overhead > of small functions? I'm not sure if it's what you ask for, but there _is_ a clear difference between the procedural languages -- I've had a 10x speed increase from rewriting PL/PgSQL stuff into PL/Perl, for instance. I'm not sure which ones would be faster, though -- I believe Ruby is slower than Perl or Python generally, but I don't know how it all works out in a PL/* setting. /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/