Re: Multiple insert performance trick or performance misunderstanding? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Multiple insert performance trick or performance misunderstanding?
Date
Msg-id 23702.1127596541@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Multiple insert performance trick or performance misunderstanding?  (Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com> writes:
> Is it expected that I'd be better off sending big
> concatenated strings like
>    "insert into tbl (c1,c2) values (v1,v2);insert into tbl (c1,c2) values (v3,v4);..."
> instead of sending them one at a time?

It's certainly possible, if the network round trip from client to server
is slow.  I do not think offhand that there is any material advantage
for the processing within the server (assuming you've wrapped the whole
thing into one transaction in both cases); if anything, the
concatenated-statement case is probably a bit worse inside the server
because it will transiently eat more memory.  But network latency or
client-side per-command overhead could well cause the results you see.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Ron Mayer
Date:
Subject: Multiple insert performance trick or performance misunderstanding?
Next
From: Michael Ben-Nes
Date:
Subject: Re: Advice on RAID card