From: | "Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Insert Performance |
Date: | 2002-09-25 21:25:54 |
Message-ID: | 031f01c264da$22729d20$4201a8c0@beeblebrox |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at> writes:
> > To insert another 10562 rows takes about 12 minutes now!!!
>
> See
> http://www.ca.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.2/postgres/populate.html
> particularly the point about not committing each INSERT as a separate
> transaction.
>
> regards, tom lane
As I said I wrote a function to insert the rows (PL/pgSQL). All values were
inserted inside a single function call; I always though that a function call
would be executed inside a transaction block. Experience says it does.
About the other points in the docs:
> Use COPY FROM:
Well, I am currently comparing INSERT to COPY ... ;)
> Remove Indexes:
Doesn't COPY also have to update indexes?
> ANALYZE Afterwards:
I have done a VACUUM FULL; VACUUM ANALYZE; just before running the test.
So is it just the planner/optimizer/etc. costs? Would a PREPARE in 7.3 help?
Best Regards,
Michael Paesold
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Patrick Welche | 2002-09-25 21:29:49 | Re: Relation 0 does not exist |
Previous Message | Michael Paesold | 2002-09-25 21:23:40 | Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS? |