Re: JDBC addBatch more efficient? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Kris Jurka
Subject Re: JDBC addBatch more efficient?
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSO.4.64.0804210306420.25756@leary.csoft.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to JDBC addBatch more efficient?  (David Wall <d.wall@computer.org>)
Responses Re: JDBC addBatch more efficient?  (David Wall <d.wall@computer.org>)
Re: JDBC addBatch more efficient?  (Ivano Luberti <luberti@archicoop.it>)
List pgsql-general

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008, David Wall wrote:

> Just checking if the JDBC library's batch processing code is more efficient
> with respect to the postgresql back end or not.  Does it really batch the
> requests and submit them once over the link, or does it just send them to the
> database to be processed one at a time?
>

The JDBC driver's batch processing is more efficient than regular
execution because it requires fewer network roundtrips so there's less
waiting.  The JDBC batch is broken into an internal batch size of 256
statement and all of these are sent over to the server at once.

Kris Jurka

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: David
Date:
Subject: Insert Rewrite rules
Next
From: Klint Gore
Date:
Subject: Re: Insert Rewrite rules