From: | Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Array interface |
Date: | 2010-11-10 09:42:39 |
Message-ID: | 4CDA690F.1030408@catalyst.net.nz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 10/11/10 22:10, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
>
> What might also be interesting is doing each INSERT with an array-load
> of bind variables appended to the VALUES clause - as this will only do
> 1 insert call per "array" of values.
This is probably more like what you were expecting:
rows num values tuples(i.e array size) elapsed
1000000 1 106
1000000 10 14
1000000 100 13
1000000 1000 14
I didn't try to use PREPARE + EXECUTE here, just did "do" with the
INSERT + array size number of VALUES tuples (execute could well be
faster). The obvious difference here is we only do rows/(array size)
number of insert calls.
Cheers
Mark
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
execinsert-values.pl | application/x-perl | 1.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-11-10 12:38:43 | Re: anti-join chosen even when slower than old plan |
Previous Message | 静安寺 | 2010-11-10 09:37:29 | Why dose the planner select one bad scan plan. |