List:Internals« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Brian Aker Date:June 12 2008 3:36pm
Subject:Re: Stored Procedures in C++? (and direct access to storage engine API)
View as plain text  
Hi!

On Jun 12, 2008, at 6:13 AM, Sergei Golubchik wrote:

> OXS (Mark, Brian) was few times slower than a built-in function. On
> Linux (my laptop with Gentoo) there was no noticeable difference.

Did anyone document your experiment? The trainers have been repeating  
this bit of information. I've not seen anyone blog to the contrary the  
original "UDF's are slower".

It would be interesting to know how FreeBSD stacked up on this.

Cheers,
	-Brian

BTW OSX to me is great for development, but as a production server?  
Forget it. If the performance costs are essentially the same on linux,  
this furthers the argument that more functions should be stripped from  
the server and shipped optionally.

--
_______________________________________________________
Brian "Krow" Aker, brian at tangent.org
Seattle, Washington
http://krow.net/                     <-- Me
http://tangent.org/                <-- Software
_______________________________________________________
You can't grep a dead tree.



Thread
Stored Procedures in C++? (and direct access to storage engine API)Kazuho Oku11 Jun
  • Re: Stored Procedures in C++? (and direct access to storage engine API)Brian Aker11 Jun
    • Re: Stored Procedures in C++? (and direct access to storage engine API)Kazuho Oku12 Jun
      • Re: Stored Procedures in C++? (and direct access to storage engine API)Brian Aker12 Jun
        • Re: Stored Procedures in C++? (and direct access to storage engineAPI)Sergei Golubchik12 Jun
          • Re: Stored Procedures in C++? (and direct access to storage engine API)Brian Aker12 Jun
        • Re: Stored Procedures in C++? (and direct access to storage engine API)Kazuho Oku13 Jun
          • Re: Stored Procedures in C++? (and direct access to storage engine API)Kazuho Oku13 Jun