Re: dblink performance - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Marc Mamin
Subject Re: dblink performance
Date
Msg-id C4DAC901169B624F933534A26ED7DF310861B22E@JENMAIL01.ad.intershop.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: dblink performance  (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: dblink performance  (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
> >
> > I find dblink being a nice tool as long as the data volume to
> transfer
> > remains low.
> > I've evaluated it to implement a clustered Postgres environment, but
> > gave it up due to the poor performances.
> > Still waiting for the binary transfer before the next try ;-)
>
> Binary transfer is not a super big deal in terms of performance
> actually in the general case. It's only substantially faster in a few
> cases like timestamp, geo types, and of course bytea.  Lack of
> parameterization I find to be a bigger deal actually -- it's more of a
> usability headache than a performance thing.
>
> Also FYI binary dblink between databases is going to be problematic
> for any non built in type unless the type oids are synchronized across
> databases.
>
> merlin

Thanks,
... so I don't really understand where all the time get lost in the
example I posted a few weeks ago:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2011-09/msg00436.php

Marc Mamin

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: dblink performance
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: Tables creation date and time