Re: Read only transactions - Commit or Rollback - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Grega Bremec
Subject Re: Read only transactions - Commit or Rollback
Date
Msg-id 43A7EDD5.1080400@p0f.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Read only transactions - Commit or Rollback  (Nörder-Tuitje, Marcus <noerder-tuitje@technology.de>)
List pgsql-performance
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Nörder-Tuitje wrote:
|> We have a database containing PostGIS MAP data, it is accessed
|> mainly via JDBC. There are multiple simultaneous read-only
|> connections taken from the JBoss connection pooling, and there
|> usually are no active writers. We use connection.setReadOnly(true).
|>
|> Now my question is what is best performance-wise, if it does make
|> any difference at all:
|>
|> Having autocommit on or off? (I presume "off")
|>
|> Using commit or rollback?
|>
|> Committing / rolling back occasionally (e. G. when returning the
|> connection to the pool) or not at all (until the pool closes the
|> connection)?
|>
| afaik, this should be completely neglectable.
|
| starting a transaction implies write access. if there is none, You do
| not need to think about transactions, because there are none.
|
| postgres needs to schedule the writing transactions with the reading
| ones, anyway.
|
| But I am not that performance profession anyway ;-)

Hello, Marcus, Nörder, list.

What about isolation? For several dependent calculations, MVCC doesn't
happen a bit with autocommit turned on, right?

Cheers,
- --
~    Grega Bremec
~    gregab at p0f dot net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDp+2afu4IwuB3+XoRA6j3AJ0Ri0/NrJtHg4xBNcFsVFFW0XvCoQCfereo
aX6ThZIlPL0RhETJK9IcqtU=
=xalw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: William Lai
Date:
Subject: unsubscribe
Next
From: Nörder-Tuitje, Marcus
Date:
Subject: Re: Read only transactions - Commit or Rollback