Re: Performance with temporary table
От | samantha mahindrakar |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance with temporary table |
Дата | |
Msg-id | f0c828c40804081228x6e1edf2l881fe0725f1a5504@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Performance with temporary table (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance with temporary table
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Well instead of creating a temp table everytime i just created a permanant table and insert the data into it everytime and truncate it. I created indexes on this permanent table too. This did improve the performance to some extent. Does using permanant tables also bloat the catalog or hinder the performance? Thanks Samantha On 4/8/08, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > samantha mahindrakar escribió: > > > So the program necessarily creates a temporary table evrytime it has > > to correct a record. However this table is dropeed after each record > > is corrected. > > Perhaps it would be better to truncate the temp table instead. > > > Iam not sure if i can use a cursor to replicate the functionality of > > the temp table. Is the performance bad because of the creation and > > deletion of the temp table? > > Yes -- if you create/drop thousands of temp tables (or create/drop the > same temp table thousands of time), the resulting catalog bloat is > likely to hinder performance. Perhaps autovacuum should be at work here > (and if not you can solve the issue with manual vacuums to the system > catalogs), but even then it is at best unnecessary. > > -- > Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ > The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. >
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: