2008/8/6 Giorgio Valoti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On 06/ago/08, at 16:04, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>> 2008/8/6 Giorgio Valoti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>
>>> Hi all, I think I've read somewhere in the documentation that the
>>> invocation
>>> of functions written in procedural languages (with the excepti
On mið, 2008-08-06 at 20:48 +0200, Giorgio Valoti wrote:
> On 06/ago/08, at 16:04, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> >
> > it's depend. Start of interpret is only one overhead.
> > Other is date
> > conversions to language compatible types (without C and plpgsql).
> So is plpgsql slower on date conversio
On 06/ago/08, at 16:04, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2008/8/6 Giorgio Valoti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi all, I think I've read somewhere in the documentation that the
invocation
of functions written in procedural languages (with the exception of
plpgsql)
incur in performance hit due to the call the la
2008/8/6 Giorgio Valoti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi all, I think I've read somewhere in the documentation that the invocation
> of functions written in procedural languages (with the exception of plpgsql)
> incur in performance hit due to the call the language interpreter. Is that
> correct or am I c
if you're using apache yes your module's performance is related to how many
child processes are spawned by mod_prefork
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/prefork.html
HTH
Martin
__
Disclaimer and confidentiality note
Everything in this e-mail and
