Home > mailing lists

Re: WAL + SSD = slow inserts? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From	bricklen
Subject	Re: WAL + SSD = slow inserts?
Date	December 5, 2013 22:19:32
Msg-id	CAGrpgQ8HHvp8Z_SGAFZ1VXu90eGS8c3vbaDn7PD8xS4j8LGL8w@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw
In response to	Re: WAL + SSD = slow inserts? (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>)
Responses	Re: WAL + SSD = slow inserts? (Skarsol <skarsol@gmail.com>)
List	pgsql-performance

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:

Rules have a lot of overhead. Is there a reason you're not using
defaults or triggers?

Or for even less overhead, load the partitions directly, and preferably use "DEFAULT nextval('some_sequence')" as Scott mentioned.

From: Claudio Freire
Date: 05 December 2013, 21:13:55
Subject: Re: Parallel Select query performance and shared buffers

From: Kevin Grittner
Date: 05 December 2013, 23:29:41
Subject: Re: Explain analyze time overhead