Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D23564FD07 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:42:23 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 90722-07 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:42:12 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from nts.biz.ua (amn-trans.te.ua [217.196.165.165]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5FB964FCF0 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:42:16 -0300 (ADT) Received: from nts.biz.ua (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nts.biz.ua (Postfix) with ESMTP id C46EB580133 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:42:13 +0300 (EEST) Received: by nts.biz.ua (Postfix, from userid 1004) id A0C0D581425; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:42:13 +0300 (EEST) Received: from [10.0.0.14] (unknown [10.0.0.14]) by nts.biz.ua (Postfix) with ESMTP id 026CA554089 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:42:07 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <48B1733D.6050201@nts.biz.ua> Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:42:05 +0300 From: DiezelMax User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080725) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Large number of tables slow insert Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200808/306 X-Sequence-Number: 31187 Does all INSERTs are made by one application? Maybe PREPARED STATEMENTS will help you? What about optimization on application level?