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

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

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de>
Cc: Guoping Zhang <guoping(dot)zhang(at)nec(dot)com(dot)au>,pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance penalty for remote access of postgresql (8.1.3)? any experiance?
Date: 2006-07-19 14:26:43
Message-ID: 20060719142643.GF20016@kenobi.snowman.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
* Florian Weimer (fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de) wrote:
> * Stephen Frost:
> > Actually, can't you stick multiple inserts into a given 'statement'?
> > ie: insert into abc (123); insert into abc (234);
> 
> IIRC, this breaks with PQexecParams, which is the recommended method
> for executing SQL statements nowadays.

For prepared queries you're absolutely correct.  It's also true that
it's the recommended approach for large numbers of inserts.  If the
network delay is more of a problem than the processing speed then it
might make sense.

It does seem to me that with multi-value insert we might consider
changes to libpq to be able to use multi-value prepared inserts...  Or
it might be interesting to see the performance of non-prepared
multi-value inserts vs. prepared statements.

	Thanks,

		Stephen

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Bill MoranDate: 2006-07-19 14:41:49
Subject: Re: Performance penalty for remote access of postgresql
Previous:From: Florian WeimerDate: 2006-07-19 14:18:03
Subject: Re: Performance penalty for remote access of postgresql (8.1.3)? any experiance?

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