X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7C1AD907C for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2005 11:36:31 -0400 (AST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 42883-09 for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2005 15:36:28 +0000 (GMT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49BBAD8F1D for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2005 11:36:29 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jA4FaYNM013862; Fri, 4 Nov 2005 10:36:34 -0500 (EST) To: "Merlin Moncure" Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: insert performance for win32 In-reply-to: <6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB3417DD7CB@Herge.rcsinc.local> References: <6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB3417DD7CB@Herge.rcsinc.local> Comments: In-reply-to "Merlin Moncure" message dated "Fri, 04 Nov 2005 10:31:11 -0500" Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 10:36:34 -0500 Message-ID: <13861.1131118594@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.006 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.006] X-Spam-Score: 0.006 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200511/79 X-Sequence-Number: 15336 "Merlin Moncure" writes: > yeah. I'm guessing problem is in the mingw flex/bison (which I really, > really hope is not the case) or some other win32 specific block of code. > I'm snooping around there... Maybe I'm confused here, but I thought we had established that the local and remote cases behave differently for you? If so I'd suppose that it must be a networking issue, and there's little point in looking inside psql. If the problem is internal to psql, gprof or similar tool would be helpful ... got anything like that on Windows? regards, tom lane