MySQL 5 Stored Procedures: Relic or Revolution?
It would be terribly unfair of us to expect the first release of the MySQL stored program language to be blisteringly fast. After all, languages such as Perl and PHP have been the subject of tweaking and optimization for about a decade, while the latest generation of programming languages—.NET and Java—has been the subject of a shorter, but more intensive optimization process by some of the biggest software companies in the world. So, right from the start, we might expect that the MySQL stored program language would lag in comparison with the other languages commonly used in the MySQL world.
Still, it's important to get a sense of the raw performance of the language. First, let's see how quickly the stored program language can crunch numbers. The first example compares a stored procedure calculating prime numbers against an identical algorithm implemented in alternative languages.
In this computationally intensive trial, MySQL performed poorly compared with other languages—five times slower than PHP or Perl, and dozens of times slower than Java, .NET or C (Figure 3).
Most of the time, stored programs are dominated by database access time, where stored programs have a natural performance advantage over other programming languages because of their lower network overhead. However, if you are writing a number-crunching routine, and you have a choice between implementing it in the stored program language or in another language, such as PHP or Java, you may wisely decide against using the stored program solution.
If the previous example left you feeling less than enthusiastic about stored program performance, this next example should cheer you right up. Although stored programs aren't particularly zippy when it comes to number crunching, it is definitely true that you don't normally write stored programs simply to perform math; stored programs almost always process data from the database. In these circumstances, the difference between stored program and PHP or Java performance is usually minimal, unless network overhead is a big factor. When a program is required to process large numbers of rows from the database, a stored program can substantially outperform programs written in client languages, because it does not have to wait for rows to be transferred across the network—the stored program runs inside the database. Figure 4 shows how a stored procedure that aggregates millions of rows can perform well even when called from a remote host across the network, while a Java program with identical logic suffers from severe network-driven response time degradation.
Although it is generally useful to encapsulate data access logic inside stored programs, it is usually inadvisable to “fragment” business and application logic by implementing some of it in stored programs and the rest of it in the middle tier or the application client.
Debugging application errors that involve interactions between stored program code and other application code may be many times more difficult than debugging code that is completely encapsulated in the application layer. For instance, there is currently no debugger that can trace program flow from the application code into the MySQL stored program code.
Also, if your application relies on stored procedures, that's an additional skill that you or your team will have to acquire and maintain.
It's becoming increasingly common for an Object-Relational Mapping (ORM) framework to mediate interactions between the application and the database. ORM is very common in Java (Hibernate and EJB), almost unavoidable in Ruby on Rails (ActiveRecord) and far less common in PHP (though there are an increasing number of PHP ORM packages available). ORM systems generate SQL to maintain a mapping between program objects and database tables. Although most ORM systems allow you to overwrite the ORM SQL with your own code, such as a stored procedure call, doing so negates some of the advantages of the ORM system. In short, stored procedures become harder to use and a lot less attractive when used in combination with ORM.
|Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.1 beta available on IBM Power Platform||Jan 23, 2015|
|Designing with Linux||Jan 22, 2015|
|Wondershaper—QOS in a Pinch||Jan 21, 2015|
|Ideal Backups with zbackup||Jan 19, 2015|
|Non-Linux FOSS: Animation Made Easy||Jan 14, 2015|
|Internet of Things Blows Away CES, and it May Be Hunting for YOU Next||Jan 12, 2015|
- Designing with Linux
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.1 beta available on IBM Power Platform
- Wondershaper—QOS in a Pinch
- Internet of Things Blows Away CES, and it May Be Hunting for YOU Next
- Ideal Backups with zbackup
- Slow System? iotop Is Your Friend
- New Products
- Hats Off to Mozilla
- Non-Linux FOSS: Animation Made Easy
- diff -u: What's New in Kernel Development