Re: foreign table batch inserts

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Manuel Kniep <m(dot)kniep(at)web(dot)de>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp" <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Subject: Re: foreign table batch inserts
Date: 2016-05-23 09:35:06
Message-ID: CAMsr+YE0xFKd+L8rBH26g5=Mo1H-xiCm9fT0H_hYk_3JQ+hyvg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 20 May 2016 at 23:18, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:

> On 20 May 2016 at 15:35, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> You can, however, omit Sync from between messages and send a series of
>> protocol messages, like
>>
>> Parse/Bind/Execute/Bind/Execute/Bind/Execute/Sync
>>
>> to avoid round-trip overheads.
>>
>>
> I implemented what I think is a pretty solid proof of concept of this for
> kicks this evening. Attached, including basic test program. Patch attached.
> The performance difference over higher latency links is huge, see below.
>

I finished it off and submitted it.

http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAMsr+YFUjJytRyV4J-16bEoiZyH=4nj+sQ7JP9ajwz=B4dMMZw(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com#CAMsr+YFUjJytRyV4J-16bEoiZyH=4nj+sQ7JP9ajwz=B4dMMZw@mail.gmail.com

https://commitfest.postgresql.org/10/634/

I'll use the other thread for the patch from now on.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2016-05-23 10:05:41 Re: Declarative partitioning
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2016-05-23 09:19:09 PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq