Re: performance libpq vs JDBC
От | Richard Huxton |
---|---|
Тема | Re: performance libpq vs JDBC |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4D0A081E.9010103@archonet.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: performance libpq vs JDBC (Werner Scholtes <Werner.Scholtes@heuboe.de>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 16/12/10 12:28, Werner Scholtes wrote: > Thanks a lot for your advice. I found the difference: My Java program > sends one huge SQL string containing 1000 INSERT statements separated > by ';' (without using prepared statements at all!), whereas my C++ > program sends one INSERT statement with parameters to be prepared and > after that 1000 times parameters. Now I refactured my C++ program to > send also 1000 INSERT statements in one call to PQexec and reached > the same performance as my Java program. So - it was the network round-trip overhead. Like Divakar suggested, COPY or VALUES (),(),() would work too. You mention multiple updates/deletes too. Perhaps the cleanest and fastest method would be to build a TEMP table containing IDs/values required and join against that for your updates/deletes. > I just wonder why anyone should use prepared statements at all? Not everything is a simple INSERT. Preparing saves planning-time on repeated SELECTs. It also provides some SQL injection safety since you provide parameters rather than building a SQL string. -- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: