X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BDD68B9D42 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:02:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 99242-04 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:02:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.90]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61AD28B9CF2 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:02:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mwynhau.demon.co.uk ([193.237.186.96] helo=mainbox.archonet.com) by anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 4.42) id 1D3rTu-000F9G-7p; Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:02:50 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.17] (client17.archonet.com [192.168.1.17]) by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96616179E5; Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:02:49 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <421C38A8.5010809@archonet.com> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:02:48 +0000 From: Richard Huxton User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Fradkin Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Speeds using a transaction vrs not References: <004301c5192c$a3c3f0f0$797ba8c0@jfradkin> In-Reply-To: <004301c5192c$a3c3f0f0$797ba8c0@jfradkin> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.062 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200502/266 X-Sequence-Number: 20376 Joel Fradkin wrote: > I wrote a .net program to move my data to postgres (works great on > SQ_ASCII). > > In fiddling around I tried it using the odbc driver and a transaction > originally, but converted it to using the .net connectivity but no > transaction. > > What I found was it moved my database (4 gig in MSSQL) in 2 hours using the > .net, but 12 hours with the odbc and transaction. You *are* using transactions, you don't have a choice. Did you do the transfer of all 4GB in ONE transaction with the ODBC? Please describe the process in more detail. -- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd