Re: Multiple COPY statements
От | Andy Colson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Multiple COPY statements |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4FAC1425.2090908@squeakycode.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Multiple COPY statements (Lee Hachadoorian <Lee.Hachadoorian+L@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On 5/10/2012 2:00 PM, Lee Hachadoorian wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Andy Colson<andy@squeakycode.net> wrote: >> On 5/10/2012 1:10 PM, Lee Hachadoorian wrote: >>> >>> 2) Is there a performance hit to doing a COPY to more than one table >>> in the same transaction? >> >> >> No, I don't think so. I assume you are the only user hitting the >> import_table, so holding one big transaction wont hurt anything. > > Actually what I mean is that there are multiple import tables, > import_table1 ... import_table100. But it is true that I would be the > only user hitting the import tables. > >>> Any other advice will be appreciated. >> >> >> To really speed it up, you'd need to run multiple concurrent connections >> each doing COPY's. Maybe up to the number of cores you have. (of course >> you dont want each connection to fire off truncates, but concurrent should >> trump "skip wall" in terms of speed). >> >> If import_table is just a temp holding stot you can look into temp and/or >> unlogged tables. > > Yes, it is a staging table, data needs to be manipulated before > shunting to its desired destination. I think unlogged tables will be > helpful, and if I understand correctly then I wouldn't need to use the > BEGIN; TRUNCATE; COPY...; END; trick. And would unlogged + concurrent > connections work together? > > --Lee > Oh yes. concurrent + unlogged would be the best of all worlds. -Andy
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: