4 ms·
I hope it's not as bad as PL/R. Seemed like a good idea, but the performance was so terrible that it was essentially useless.
by saosebastiao 11y ago
I hope it's not as bad as PL/R. Seemed like a good idea, but the performance was so terrible that it was essentially useless.
- jeltz 11y agoAny idea what makes PL/R slow? Is it time spent doing data conversions from PostgreSQL types to R types?
- tankenmate 11y agoThis article[0] shows exactly this problem; and it links to patches that handle this issue. The article is 4.5 years old, not sure if the patches have been upstreamed. [0] http://www.credativ.co.uk/credativ-blog/2010/07/postgresql-topic-of-the-day---plr-performance-improvements http://www.credativ.co.uk/credativ-blog/2010/07/postgresql-t...