undefined | Better HN

0 pointsscottlamb1mo ago0 comments

I'd think so. Stored procedures let you do multi-statement sequences in fewer round trips. In 2026 larger systems are as likely as ever to run PostgreSQL on a different machine (or machines) than the application server. While latency between the two generally goes down over time, it's still not nothing. You may care about the latency of individual operations or the throughput impact of latency while holding a lock (see Amdahl's law).

Of course, the reasons not to use stored procedures still apply. They're logic, but they're versioned with the database schema, not with your application, which can be a pain.

0 comments

ComputerGuru1mo ago

A supporting point and a counterpoint:

* Good database drivers will let you pipeline multiple queries concurrently (esp. in languages with async support), effectively eliminating the _N_x roundtrip cost (you can even execute them in parallel if you use multiple connections, not that I recommend doing that). But obviously this is only doable where the queries are independent of one another; I use this mainly to perform query splitting efficiently if the join key is already known.

* These days databases are often effectively versioned alongside the code anyway, at least for either smaller projects that "own" the database, eliminating the biggest issue with stored procedures.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsscottlamb1mo ago0 comments

Of course, the reasons not to use stored procedures still apply. They're logic, but they're versioned with the database schema, not with your application, which can be a pain.

0 comments

ComputerGuru1mo ago

A supporting point and a counterpoint:

* These days databases are often effectively versioned alongside the code anyway, at least for either smaller projects that "own" the database, eliminating the biggest issue with stored procedures.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse