Re: performance for high-volume log insertion
От | Glenn Maynard |
---|---|
Тема | Re: performance for high-volume log insertion |
Дата | |
Msg-id | bd36f99e0904221516tb8285bn1c1af6205fa272e0@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: performance for high-volume log insertion (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: performance for high-volume log insertion
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote: > For a single column table, I wouldn't expect much either. With more > columns I think it would be a larger improvement. Maybe. I'm not sure why parsing "(1,2,3,4,5)" in an EXECUTE parameter should be faster than parsing the exact same thing in an INSERT, though. > I've seen it help, but I was sending everything as binary (I figured, > once I'm doing it, might as well do it all), which included dates, > timestamps, IP addresses, integers, and some text. It may have more of > an impact on dates and timestamps than on simple integers. Of course, you still need to get it in that format. Be careful to include any parsing you're doing to create the binary date in the benchmarks. Inevitably, at least part of the difference will be costs simply moving from the psql process to your own. -- Glenn Maynard
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: