Re: Multiple insert performance trick or performance misunderstanding?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Multiple insert performance trick or performance misunderstanding?
Date: 2005-09-24 21:15:41
Message-ID: 23702.1127596541@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> writes:
> Is it expected that I'd be better off sending big
> concatenated strings like
> "insert into tbl (c1,c2) values (v1,v2);insert into tbl (c1,c2) values (v3,v4);..."
> instead of sending them one at a time?

It's certainly possible, if the network round trip from client to server
is slow. I do not think offhand that there is any material advantage
for the processing within the server (assuming you've wrapped the whole
thing into one transaction in both cases); if anything, the
concatenated-statement case is probably a bit worse inside the server
because it will transiently eat more memory. But network latency or
client-side per-command overhead could well cause the results you see.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Ben-Nes 2005-09-25 10:17:27 Re: Advice on RAID card
Previous Message Ron Mayer 2005-09-24 20:51:16 Multiple insert performance trick or performance misunderstanding?