X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D076F9DCA57 for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 20:27:17 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 19346-10 for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 20:27:20 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A44479DC80E for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 20:27:15 -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 k2L0RHhv009397; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:27:17 -0500 (EST) To: "Craig A. James" cc: Mikael Carneholm , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Migration study, step 1: bulk write performance optimization In-reply-to: <441EC652.1010807@modgraph-usa.com> References: <7F10D26ECFA1FB458B89C5B4B0D72C2B088286@sesrv12.wirelesscar.com> <441EC652.1010807@modgraph-usa.com> Comments: In-reply-to "Craig A. James" message dated "Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:12:18 -0800" Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:27:17 -0500 Message-ID: <9396.1142900837@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.113 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.113] X-Spam-Score: 0.113 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/359 X-Sequence-Number: 17796 "Craig A. James" writes: > If you haven't explored the COPY command yet, check it out. It is stunningly fast compared to normal INSERT commands. Note also that his "benchmark" is testing multiple INSERTs issued within a loop in a plpgsql function, which has got nearly nothing to do with the performance that will be obtained from INSERTs issued by a client (especially if said INSERTs aren't prepared and/or aren't batched into transactions). regards, tom lane