Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F3AE133FFA6
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Sat, 28 Jan 2012 19:58:23 -0400 (AST)
Received: from [2404:130:0:10::40:2] (helo=mail.catalyst.net.nz)
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>) id 1RrIA1-0006AG-6v
	for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Sat, 28 Jan 2012 23:58:23 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mail.catalyst.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9111325BA;
	Sun, 29 Jan 2012 12:58:05 +1300 (NZDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at catalyst.net.nz
Received: from mail.catalyst.net.nz ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (bertrand.catalyst.net.nz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,
	port 10024)
	with ESMTP id O1xEKLhpW7BL; Sun, 29 Jan 2012 12:58:05 +1300 (NZDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.65] (122-60-64-230.jetstream.xtra.co.nz
	[122.60.64.230]) (Authenticated sender: mark.kirkwood)
	by mail.catalyst.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2AD8631D7D;
	Sun, 29 Jan 2012 12:58:05 +1300 (NZDT)
Message-ID: <4F248B8C.8000906@catalyst.net.nz>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 12:58:04 +1300
From: Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:9.0) Gecko/20111229 Thunderbird/9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jayashankar K B <Jayashankar.KB@lnties.com>
CC: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Postgress is taking lot of CPU on our embedded hardware.
References: 
 <1365276B7BDA4C40A519F0B4088230B3096F3B17@POCITMSEXMB03.LntUniverse.com>
	<4F22D528.6090604@enterprisedb.com>
	<4F22DB8A.4080104@squeakycode.net>
	<1365276B7BDA4C40A519F0B4088230B3096F3C0D@POCITMSEXMB03.LntUniverse.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <1365276B7BDA4C40A519F0B4088230B3096F3C0D@POCITMSEXMB03.LntUniverse.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 2404:130:0:10::40:2
	(failed)
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.1 (-)
X-Archive-Number: 201201/109
X-Sequence-Number: 46121

If you can batch the inserts into groups (of say 10 to 100) it might 
help performance - i.e:

Instead of

INSERT INTO table VALUES(...);
INSERT INTO table VALUES(...);
...
INSERT INTO table VALUES(...);

do

INSERT INTO table VALUES(...),(...),...,(...);

This reduces the actual number of INSERT calls, which can be quite a win.

Regards

Mark


On 28/01/12 07:30, Jayashankar K B wrote:
> Hi Heikki Linnakangas: We are using series of Insert statements to insert the records into database.
> Sending data in binary is not an option as the module that writes into DB has been finalized.
> We do not have control over that.
>
>