Re: partition insert performance

Thanks to all for your advice. I will stay away from dynamic sql. The
current implementation of static date comparisons in the trigger is
lightning fast..(we have over 50 million inserts per day). I will bite the
maintenance overhead as I cannot compromise on performance.

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Gurjeet Singh<singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Scott Marlowe <
> scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> If you're using plpgsql prepare for a world of pain if you've got any
> >>> null values in your inserts.
> >>
> >> :) Using COALESCE isn't that bad.
>
> > In my experience it's WAY more than just coalesce.
>
> quote_nullable() would really be the right thing for inserts. However,
> I think the short answer to the OP's question is that dynamic SQL will
> lose big-time performancewise.
>
> regards, tom lane
>