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

Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

From: Mladen Gogala <mladen(dot)gogala(at)vmsinfo(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Date: 2010-10-26 21:02:55
Message-ID: 4CC741FF.8050709@vmsinfo.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
On 10/26/2010 11:41 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> yup, that's exactly what I mean -- this will give you more uniform
> insert performance (your temp table doesn't even need indexes).  Every
> N records (say 10000) you send to permanent and truncate the temp
> table.  Obviously, this is more fragile approach so weigh the
> pros/cons carefully.
>
> merlin

Truncate temporary table? What a horrible advice! All that you need is 
the temporary table to delete rows on commit.

-- 

Mladen Gogala
Sr. Oracle DBA
1500 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
(212) 329-5251
http://www.vmsinfo.com
The Leader in Integrated Media Intelligence Solutions




In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: André VolpatoDate: 2010-10-26 21:04:10
Subject: Re: AIX slow buffer reads
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2010-10-26 20:54:07
Subject: Re: CPUs for new databases

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jon NelsonDate: 2010-10-26 21:27:23
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2010-10-26 21:00:16
Subject: Re: ask for review of MERGE

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