"Luke Lonergan" <LLonergan@greenplum.com> writes:
> I guess we see the real culprit here. Anyone surprised it's the WAL?
You have not proved that at all.
I haven't had time to look at Matthew's problem, but someone upthread
implied that it was doing a separate transaction for each word. If so,
collapsing that to something more reasonable (say one xact per message)
would probably help a great deal.
regards, tom lane