Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Divakar Singh <dpsmails(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Date: 2010-10-25 18:38:52
Message-ID: 1288031932.8930.32.camel@jd-desktop (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 11:36 -0700, Divakar Singh wrote:
>  
> 68 Rows inserted: 100,000 
> Above results show good INSERT performance of PG when using SQL
> procedures. But 
> performance when I use C++ lib is very bad. I did that test some time
> back so I 
> do not have data for that right now.

This is interesting, are you using libpq or libpqXX?

Joshua D. Drake


> 
> 
-- 
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt


In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Divakar SinghDate: 2010-10-25 18:42:48
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Previous:From: Divakar SinghDate: 2010-10-25 18:36:24
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-25 18:41:29
Subject: Re: add label to enum syntax
Previous:From: Divakar SinghDate: 2010-10-25 18:36:24
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group