Re: Performance penalty for remote access of postgresql (8.1.3)? any experiance?

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Guoping Zhang <guoping(dot)zhang(at)nec(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: 'Florian Weimer' <fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance penalty for remote access of postgresql (8.1.3)? any experiance?
Date: 2006-07-19 14:01:35
Message-ID: 20060719140135.GE20016@kenobi.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

* Guoping Zhang (guoping(dot)zhang(at)nec(dot)com(dot)au) wrote:
> Obviously, if there is no better solution, the TCP round trip penalty will
> stop us doing so as we do have performance requirement.

Actually, can't you stick multiple inserts into a given 'statement'?
ie: insert into abc (123); insert into abc (234);

I'm not 100% sure if that solves the round-trip issue, but it might..
Also, it looks like we might have multi-value insert support in 8.2 (I
truely hope so anyway), so you could do something like this:
insert into abc (123),(234);

> I guess there shall be quite number of people out there facing the similar
> problem, right? No alternative solution?

Havn't run into it myself... Quite often you either have large inserts
being done using COPY commands (data warehousing and analysis work) or you
have a relatively small number of one-off inserts (OLTP) per transaction.

Enjoy,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian Weimer 2006-07-19 14:18:03 Re: Performance penalty for remote access of postgresql (8.1.3)? any experiance?
Previous Message Florian Weimer 2006-07-19 07:38:10 Re: Performance penalty for remote access of postgresql (8.1.3)? any experiance?