Kris Jurka wrote on 26.04.2009 19:07:
> Despite the size of the batch passed to the JDBC driver, the driver
> breaks it up into internal sub-batch sizes of 256 to send to the
> server. It does this to avoid network deadlocks from sending too much
> data to the server without reading any in return. If the driver was
> written differently it could handle this better and send the full batch
> size, but at the moment that's not possible and we're hoping the gains
> beyond this size aren't too large.
Ah, thanks for the info.
I have seen this behaviour with other DBMS as well.
Going beyond ~200-500 doesn't improve the performance on Oracle or SQL Server as
well.
So I guess PG wouldn't really benefit that much from a different implementation
in the driver :)
Thomas