Re: performance for high-volume log insertion - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: performance for high-volume log insertion
Date
Msg-id 20090422203703.GH8123@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: performance for high-volume log insertion  (Glenn Maynard <glennfmaynard@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: performance for high-volume log insertion  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: performance for high-volume log insertion  (Glenn Maynard <glennfmaynard@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Glenn,

* Glenn Maynard (glennfmaynard@gmail.com) wrote:
> This is all well-known, covered information, but perhaps some numbers
> will help drive this home.  40000 inserts into a single-column,
> unindexed table; with predictable results:

Thanks for doing the work.  I had been intending to but hadn't gotten to
it yet.

> separate inserts, no transaction: 21.21s
> separate inserts, same transaction: 1.89s
> 40 inserts, 100 rows/insert: 0.18s
> one 40000-value insert: 0.16s
> 40 prepared inserts, 100 rows/insert: 0.15s
> COPY (text): 0.10s
> COPY (binary): 0.10s

What about 40000 individual prepared inserts?  Just curious about it.

Also, kind of suprised about COPY text vs. binary.  What was the data
type in the table..?  If text, that makes sense, if it was an integer or
something else, I'm kind of suprised.

    Thanks,

        Stephen

Attachment

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: david@lang.hm
Date:
Subject: Re: performance for high-volume log insertion
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: performance for high-volume log insertion