| From: | Adam Siegel <adam(at)sycamore(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: realtime data inserts |
| Date: | 2003-05-12 14:51:17 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0305121048021.6628-100000@beorn.hq.sai |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
The copy from method (PQputline) allows me to achieve around 1000 inserts
per second.
On Sat, 10 May 2003, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> Are you binding your insert? IE:
>
> prepare statement INSERT INTO blah VALUES (?, ?, ?);
>
> execute statement (a, b, c)
>
> Instead of just "INSERT INTO blah VALUES(a, b, c)"
>
>
> On Sat, May 10, 2003 at 11:25:16AM -0400, Adam Siegel wrote:
> > I have realtime data flowing at a rate of 500, 512 byte packets per second.
> > I want to log the info in a database table with two other columns, one for a
> > timestamp and one for a name of the packet. The max rate I can achieve is
> > 350 inserts per second on a sun blade 2000. The inserts are grouped in a
> > transaction and I commit every 1200 records. I am storing the binary data
> > in a bytea. I am using the libpq conversion function. Not sure if that is
> > slowing me down. But I think it is the insert not the conversion.
> >
> > Any thoughts on how to achive this goal?
>
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-05-12 14:58:16 | Re: Zope |
| Previous Message | Max Bernaert | 2003-05-12 14:30:31 | Re: More than one user on postgresql database on Windows ? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Lamar Owen | 2003-05-12 14:56:02 | Re: PostgreSQL Cookbook Site Down |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-05-12 13:44:12 | Re: SET CONSTRAINTS not schema-aware |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-05-12 15:49:39 | Re: PERFORMANCE and SIZE |
| Previous Message | Lucas Adamski | 2003-05-12 07:29:50 | Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? |