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

Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Mladen Gogala <mladen(dot)gogala(at)vmsinfo(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Date: 2010-10-26 22:50:37
Message-ID: AANLkTimf9Nj8A+Spiu9q3suvZ+h71CHXRFTXFo_5aBYj@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Mladen Gogala
<mladen(dot)gogala(at)vmsinfo(dot)com> wrote:
> The table is created with "on commit obliterate rows" option which means
> that there is no need to do "truncate". The "truncate" command is a heavy
> artillery. Truncating a temporary table is like shooting ducks in a duck
> pond, with a howitzer.

This is just not true.  ON COMMIT DELETE ROWS simply arranges for a
TRUNCATE to happen immediately before each commit.  See
PreCommit_on_commit_actions() in tablecmds.c.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-26 22:51:31
Subject: Re: Select count(*), the sequel
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-10-26 22:45:30
Subject: Re: Select count(*), the sequel

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2010-10-26 23:16:53
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Previous:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2010-10-26 22:14:15
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

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