Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

From: Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Divakar Singh <dpsmails(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Steve Singer <ssinger(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Date: 2010-10-28 04:23:44
Message-ID: AANLkTikoyc=ZiZkfEkRHiie2RkJXS5myetGMJ=_QcjxO@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 21:08, Divakar Singh <dpsmails(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
> So another question pops up: What method in PostgreSQL does the stored proc
> use when I issue multiple insert (for loop for 100 thousand records) in the
> stored proc?

It uses prepared statements (unless you are using execute). There is
also the benefit of not being on the network. Assuming 0.3ms avg
latency, 1 packet per query and 100,000 queries-- thats 30s just from
latency! Granted this is just a silly estimate that happens to (more
or less) fit my numbers...

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2010-10-28 04:26:08 Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Previous Message Rob Wultsch 2010-10-28 03:43:52 Re: BBU Cache vs. spindles