Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 550B39FB4E5 for ; Sat, 21 Oct 2006 00:15:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 54566-03-3 for ; Sat, 21 Oct 2006 00:15:31 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.190]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F0CB9FB409 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 23:50:03 -0300 (ADT) Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id i2so1752397nfe for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 19:50:01 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=g7sXW9dLXy721huYYMtw7AzC1HItjibiMp2B2NUxpISjTXPcOH5DgOTtmDWtJ0uACXvdRUcwDe9JFcvjpNJ0lY+2WHP9quhJpyGC4ke5CYrbrYy9hKH4A4KgtbRk/LNAObj9ES18/JnQhHh7LKugW/IDYLrZ6luaIZjCMQwX9mg= Received: by 10.78.204.7 with SMTP id b7mr3216943hug; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 19:50:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.78.45.3 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 19:50:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 08:20:01 +0530 From: "Merlin Moncure" To: "Carlo Stonebanks" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Is ODBC that slow? Cc: alvherre@commandprompt.com In-Reply-To: <20061021023211.GA20508@alvh.no-ip.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20061021023211.GA20508@alvh.no-ip.org> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.254 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, SPF_PASS X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200610/451 X-Sequence-Number: 21580 On 10/21/06, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Carlo Stonebanks wrote: > > Our Windows-based db server has to integrate with users that work regularily > > with Access.When attempting to import user's data from Access MDB files to > > PostgreSQL, we try on eof two things: either import using EMS SQL Manager's > > Data Import from Access utility, or export from Access to Postgresql via an > > odbc-based connectionin both cases, the performance is just awful. > > Performance with Tcl's native postgres driver seems rather fine running from > > Windows a Windows client, BTW. > > > > ODBC is often blamed for this sort of thing - I have the 8.01.02 release > > dated 2006.01.31. Everything appears to be at its default setting. > > Try Command Prompt's ODBC driver. Lately it has been measured to be > consistently faster than psqlODBC. > > http://projects.commandprompt.com/public/odbcng just curious: what was the reasoning to reimplement the protocol stack in odbcng? the mainline odbc driver went in the other direction. carlo: please, please, get your mail server to quit telling me your mailbox is full :) merlin