Re: RE : RE: Postgresql vs SQLserver for this application
От | Steve Wampler |
---|---|
Тема | Re: RE : RE: Postgresql vs SQLserver for this application |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4254109B.5090809@noao.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: RE : RE: Postgresql vs SQLserver for this application ? ("Mohan, Ross" <RMohan@arbinet.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Mohan, Ross wrote: > I wish I had a Dell system and run case to show you Alex, but I don't... > however...using Oracle's "direct path" feature, it's pretty straightforward. > > We've done 110,000 rows per second into index-less tables on a big system > (IBM Power5 chips, Hitachi SAN). ( Yes, I am sure: over 100K a second. Sustained > for almost 9 minutes. ) > > Yes, this is an exception, but oracle directpath/InsertAppend/BulkLoad > feature enabled us to migrate a 4 TB database...really quickly. How close to this is PG's COPY? I get surprisingly good results using COPY with jdbc on smallish systems (now if that patch would make into the mainstream PG jdbc support!) I think COPY has a bit more overhead than what a Bulkload feature may have, but I suspect it's not that much more. > Now...if you ask me "can this work without Power5 and Hitachi SAN?" > my answer is..you give me a top end Dell and SCSI III on 15K disks > and I'll likely easily match it, yea. > > I'd love to see PG get into this range..i am a big fan of PG (just a > rank newbie) but I gotta think the underlying code to do this has > to be not-too-complex..... It may not be that far off if you can use COPY instead of INSERT. But comparing Bulkload to INSERT is a bit apples<->orangish. -- Steve Wampler -- swampler@noao.edu The gods that smiled on your birth are now laughing out loud.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: