Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 274359FB4D1 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 13:46:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 47955-02-8 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 13:46:18 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 670639FBB9F for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 13:14:40 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9QGEc1p021414; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:14:38 -0400 (EDT) To: "Matthew Peters" cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Stored procedure slower than sql? In-reply-to: <775F825B46B551499DC75DC4E92F80AB564D00@jupiter.ad.haydrian.com> References: <775F825B46B551499DC75DC4E92F80AB564D00@jupiter.ad.haydrian.com> Comments: In-reply-to "Matthew Peters" message dated "Thu, 26 Oct 2006 08:49:02 -0700" Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:14:38 -0400 Message-ID: <21413.1161879278@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.127 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200610/553 X-Sequence-Number: 21682 "Matthew Peters" writes: > How can a stored procedure containing a single query not implement the > same execution plan (assumption based on the dramatic performance > difference) that an identical ad-hoc query generates? Parameterized vs non parameterized query? regards, tom lane