>> To be more concise :
>> - ONE transaction with 4095 operations -> consumed in 80mS
>> - TEN transactions with 4095 operations each (so 40950 operations) -> 380mS (which as you said is very good -less
thanlinear growth-)
>> - ONE transaction with 4096 operations -> consumed in 4204mS (ouch ...). I confirm there are only 4096 changes in
onetransaction
>> - TEN transactions with 4095 operations each (so 40950 operations) -> 34998mS, ouch again
>
>Given the third result it's unlikely, but just to make sure: Are you
>sure network issues aren't a factor here? 40950 changes are about 3.8MB,
>over a slow network that can take a second. Additionally psql will
>display all the changes in a pager, which'll not be fast either (but
>shouldn't be included in \timing's output).
I'm doing everything on the same host, so network is not involved at all (localhost)
br
Olivier
