From: Markus Schaber <schabios@logi-track.com>
To: PostgreSQL Performance List <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres --
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:14:52 +0200
Message-ID: <20040914141452.002e5d4e@kingfisher.intern.logi-track.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pB21d.193816$X12.122954@edtnps84>
References: <20040912042442.49915.qmail@web41508.mail.yahoo.com>
<pB21d.193816$X12.122954@edtnps84>
Hi, Mischa,
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:47:17 GMT
Mischa Sandberg <ischamay.andbergsay@activestateway.com> wrote:
> On the other hand, if you do warehouse-style loading (Insert, or PG
> COPY, into a temp table; and then 'upsert' into the perm table), I can
> guarantee 2500 inserts/sec is no problem.
As we can forsee that we'll have similar insert rates to cope with in
the not-so-far future, what do you mean with 'upsert'? Do you mean a
stored procedure that iterates over the temp table?
Generally, what is the fastest way for doing bulk processing of
update-if-primary-key-matches-and-insert-otherwise operations?
Thanks,
Markus Schaber
--
markus schaber | dipl. informatiker
logi-track ag | rennweg 14-16 | ch 8001 zürich
phone +41-43-888 62 52 | fax +41-43-888 62 53
mailto:schabios@logi-track.com | www.logi-track.com
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: schabios@logi-track.com
Subject: Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres --
In-Reply-To: <20040914141452.002e5d4e@kingfisher.intern.logi-track.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox