Rafal Pietrak wrote:
>A plain INSERT of batch takes 5-10minutes on desktop postgresql (800MHz
>machine, ATA disks). When I attach trigger (*Very* simple funciton) to
>update the accounts, the INSERT take hours (2-4). But when I make just
>one single update of all accounts at the end of the batch insert, it
>takes 20-30min.
>
>
>
Why not have the INSERT go to an "inbox" table, a table whose only job
is to receive the data for future processing.
Your client code should mark all rows with a batch number as they go
in. Then when the batch is loaded, simply invoke a stored procedure to
process them. Pass the stored procedure the batch number.
IOW, have your "background trigger" be a stored procedure that is
invoked by the client, instead of trying to get the server to do it.
