Xref: alice comp.databases.oracle.misc:32887 comp.databases.oracle.server:52187 Path: alice!news-feed.fnsi.net!news.idt.net!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!news.demon.co.uk!demon!jlcomp.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Jonathan Lewis" Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.misc,comp.databases.oracle.server Subject: Re: PL/SQL vs C Performance Date: Sun, 6 Jun 1999 09:26:18 +0100 Message-ID: <928657941.7414.0.nnrp-12.9e984b29@news.demon.co.uk> References: <3759296c@newsread3.dircon.co.uk> <3759C7AE.3B2DDC4C@pobox.com> X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 928657941 nnrp-12:7414 NO-IDENT jlcomp.demon.co.uk:158.152.75.41 X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Lines: 26 You also have to consider the fact that until 8.0 PL/SQL cannot do array fetches, whereas C can. The performance impact will vary with platforms, environment etc. but I used to find a factor of 3 to 4 between C arrays abd PL/SQL loops for shifting data on a 'quiet' system. You've already had the most important suggestion though - > Sometimes you have to do both to test for performance. -- Jonathan Lewis Yet another Oracle-related web site: www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk John Seitz wrote in message <3759C7AE.3B2DDC4C@pobox.com>... >Well the real speed is that the Database doesn't have to transfer the data >across the network. C code is much faster at doing calculations, but if those >calcs require huge amounts of data from the DB then PL/SQL will more then likely >be faster. >