Re: pg_dump and --inserts / --column-inserts

From: Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump and --inserts / --column-inserts
Date: 2010-07-17 17:46:23
Message-ID: i1sq91$31n$1@dough.gmane.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Tom Lane wrote on 17.07.2010 19:35:
> Thomas Kellerer<spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote on 17.07.2010 16:36:
>>> Well, nobody's offered any actual *numbers* here.
>
>> I measured the runtime as seen from the JDBC client and as reported by explain analyze (the last line reading "Total runtime:")
>
> The "runtime" from explain analyze really should not be measurably
> different, since it doesn't include parse time or data transmission
> time, and you ought to get the same execution plan with or without the
> column names.

Interesting.

My intend _was_ to exclude data transmission from the test by using explain analyze, but I'm surprised that it doesn't include the parsing in the execution time reported from that.

> I'd dismiss those numbers as being within experimental
> error, except it seems odd that they all differ in the same direction.

And it's reproducable (at least on my computer). As I said I ran it 20 times (each run did it for 5,10,... columns) and the values I posted were averages of those runs.

Regards
Thomas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jerry LeVan 2010-07-17 19:43:56 Re: Fedora 13 killed dblink this week...
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-07-17 17:35:31 Re: pg_dump and --inserts / --column-inserts