Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4FFDEA67.6000801@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation (Shaun Thomas <sthomas@optionshouse.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 07/11/2012 04:47 PM, Shaun Thomas wrote: > On 07/11/2012 03:18 PM, Craig James wrote: > >> It strikes me as a contrived case rather than a use case. What sort of >> app repeatedly fills and truncates a small table thousands of times ... >> other than a test app to see whether you can do it or not? > > Test systems. Any company with even a medium-size QA environment will > have continuous integration systems that run unit tests on a trash > database hundreds or thousands of times through the day. Aside from > dropping/creating the database via template, which would be *really* > slow, truncate is the easiest/fastest way to reset between tests. Why is recreating the test db from a (populated) template going to be slower than truncating all the tables and repopulating from an external source? I had a client who achieved a major improvement in speed and reduction in load by moving to this method of test db setup. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: