X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0301552952 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 10:48:17 -0300 (ADT) 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 32013-09 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 13:48:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 623FC52913 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 10:48:15 -0300 (ADT) 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 j5UDmJsf018272; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 09:48:19 -0400 (EDT) To: Milan Sekanina Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: ODBC driver over network very slow In-reply-to: <42C3C967.8060605@sde.cz> References: <42C3C967.8060605@sde.cz> Comments: In-reply-to Milan Sekanina message dated "Thu, 30 Jun 2005 12:28:55 +0200" Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 09:48:19 -0400 Message-ID: <18271.1120139299@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.006 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200506/594 X-Sequence-Number: 13231 Milan Sekanina writes: > We are running an application that uses psqlodbc driver on Windows XP to > connect to a server and for some reason the download of data from the > server is very slow. We have created a very simple test application that > inserts a larger amount of data into the database and uses a simple > "SELECT * from test" to download it back. The INSERT of 10MB takes about > 4 seconds, while the SELECT takes almost 5 minutes (with basically > nothing else running on both the network and the two computers). If we > run the PostgreSQL server on the local machine so that the network is > not used, both actions are very fast. I seem to recall having seen similar reports not involving ODBC at all. Try searching the mailing-list archives, but I think the cases we solved involved getting rid of third-party add-ons to the Windows TCP stack. regards, tom lane