Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Guoping Zhang (guoping(dot)zhang(at)nec(dot)com(dot)au) wrote:
>>Obviously, if there is no better solution, the TCP round trip penalty will
>>stop us doing so as we do have performance requirement.
> Actually, can't you stick multiple inserts into a given 'statement'?
> ie: insert into abc (123); insert into abc (234);
> I'm not 100% sure if that solves the round-trip issue, but it might..
> Also, it looks like we might have multi-value insert support in 8.2 (I
> truely hope so anyway), so you could do something like this:
> insert into abc (123),(234);
Yeah, see my post from last night on PATCHES. Something like "insert
into abc (123); insert into abc (234); ..." actually seems to work
pretty well as long as you don't drive the machine into swapping. If
you're doing a very large number of INSERTs, break it up into bite-sized
chunks and you should be fine.
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Guoping Zhang||Date: 2006-07-20 06:32:45|
|Subject: Re: Performance penalty for remote access of postgresql (8.1.3)? any experiance?|
|Previous:||From: Bill Moran||Date: 2006-07-19 14:41:49|
|Subject: Re: Performance penalty for remote access of postgresql|