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

Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

From: Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Divakar Singh <dpsmails(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Steve Singer <ssinger(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Date: 2010-10-28 04:23:44
Message-ID: AANLkTikoyc=ZiZkfEkRHiie2RkJXS5myetGMJ=_QcjxO@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 21:08, Divakar Singh <dpsmails(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
> So another question pops up: What method in PostgreSQL does the stored proc
> use when I issue multiple insert (for loop for 100 thousand records) in the
> stored proc?

It uses prepared statements (unless you are using execute).  There is
also the benefit of not being on the network.  Assuming 0.3ms avg
latency, 1 packet per query and 100,000 queries-- thats 30s just from
latency!  Granted this is just a silly estimate that happens to (more
or less) fit my numbers...

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2010-10-28 04:26:08
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Previous:From: Rob WultschDate: 2010-10-28 03:43:52
Subject: Re: BBU Cache vs. spindles

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