Re: Input and Output data traffic

Man now YOU really screwed my mind. AHUAHua

Actually i'm doing tests for all operations (insert, select, delete,
update), but here in mailist to keep things simple I'm trying to focus on
the insert operation.

Let's keep simple. The objective is (example):

Java
sent: 100 bytes
received 30 bytes

Python
sent: 100 bytes
received: 85 bytes

I want to see the python driver getting the same result (forget about %
differences maybe that turned everything more confuse). Did you get it?

But anyway, I'll do more tests, and maybe even put some charts here, I'll
recheck my implementations too. We are talking about this since the morning
and I didn't have time to recheck the code (now with postgres logs like
sugested). Maybe everything is an false alarm. :)

2011/5/11 Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net>

> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 02:37:28PM -0300, Israel Ben Guilherme Fonseca
> wrote:
>
> > With that extra clause on every commit, that could increase the size of
> the
> > sent data. JDBC doesn't do it, so maybe it could be the cause, at last
> for
> > the sent data not the received data.
>
> This is what you originally wrote:
>
> >> The volume of sent data (application -> database) and the response data
> >> (database -> application) are basically the same.
> >>
> >> For simple inserts/updates/deletes i got a difference of about 15%
> between
> >> sent and received data.
>
> (later you said you were testing INSERTs only ...)
>
> >> I used a ruby driver and got the same results for the same instruction.
> >>
> >> Finally I used a Java JDBC driver (for postgres too), and the difference
> was
> >> huge, it was 70% (the received data was much smaller).
>
> What you've been wondering here is this:
>
> - psycopg2 sends, say, 100 bytes (+some) and receives 85 bytes (+some)
> - JDBC sends, say, 100 bytes and receives 30 bytes
>
> Now, since psycopg2 supposedly *sends more* data (namely
> setting the transaction isolation level) how is that
> supposed to make the difference between sent and received
> *smaller* ? This would only make sense if the "more" data
> would provoke *a lot more* data to be received. Which
> setting the transaction isolation certainly shouldn't.
>
> But maybe I'm royally screwing up my thinking :-)))
>
> Karsten
> --
> GPG key ID E4071346 @ gpg-keyserver.de
> E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346
>
> --
> Sent via psycopg mailing list (psycopg(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/psycopg
>