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

Re: Continuous inserts...

From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
To: Joerg Hessdoerfer <Joerg(dot)Hessdoerfer(at)sea-gmbh(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Continuous inserts...
Date: 2000-08-22 15:59:29
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.10.10008220857460.21152-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql
Wierd, I've not seen that behavior really, although I've never
done time sensitive stuff.  It might be the time before the
shared cache updates?  Not sure really.  If you do the rule
inline with your inserts (rather than a second transaction)
does it still wait?

Stephan Szabo
sszabo(at)bigpanda(dot)com

On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Joerg Hessdoerfer wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> At 08:18 18.08.00 -0700, you wrote:
> [...]
> 
> >I didn't try with vacuum, I just did a table lock and that
> >seemed to still hang the inserts with two tables, so I figured
> >maximum safety was adding the third table.  If it works with two
> >that's much cooler.  Was this with real data or just a small test
> >set?
> 
> It was a test set ... ~20000 records, *BUT* I found that postgres
> decides when it starts to use the rule - means, if you do continous
> inserts on the table and create the rule, there's a varying time until
> the rule applies. In my first tests, I re-connected the DB very often,
> and the the change seemed immediate.
> 
> Any ideas on how to 'promote' the rules faster?!?
> 


In response to

Responses

pgsql-sql by date

Next:From: Brian C. DoyleDate: 2000-08-22 16:26:35
Subject: Re: Time Help
Previous:From: Graham VickrageDate: 2000-08-22 15:37:09
Subject: Null function parameters

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