X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [64.117.224.130])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8004FD1C7F2
	for <pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 23 Jul 2003 20:12:37 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([64.117.224.193])
	by localhost (neptune.hub.org [64.117.224.130]) (amavisd-new,
	port 10024) with ESMTP id 57636-04
	for <pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 23 Jul 2003 17:11:56 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78BB1D1C7F6
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 17:12:35 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from [66.219.92.2] (HELO temoku)
	by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2)
	with ESMTP id 3249187; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 13:12:53 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com
Organization: Aglio Database Solutions
To: Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>, greg@turnstep.com
Subject: Re: obtuse plpgsql function needs
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 13:11:36 -0700
User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
References: <69939b465aaab0cbd79000ce42891f58@biglumber.com>
	<1058990513.22260.698.camel@camel>
In-Reply-To: <1058990513.22260.698.camel@camel>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <200307231311.36341.josh@agliodbs.com>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200307/348
X-Sequence-Number: 14462

Robert,

> 2) would it be faster in pltcl? seems like it would if i didn't have to
> do the catalog lookups, but is pltcl inherently faster anyways?

Probably, yes.   Execution of dynamic query strings in PL/pgSQL tends to be=
=20
pretty slow.

--=20
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco