Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
| От | Merlin Moncure |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AANLkTinaW3ZtGJbzgAARG0WfAOJxSPAbdVAZa6X_2dh+@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle (Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists@yahoo.it>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement
compared to Oracle
Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle |
| Список | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists@yahoo.it> wrote: >> temp tables are not wal logged or >> synced. Periodically they can be flushed to a permanent table. > > > What do you mean with "Periodically they can be flushed to > a permanent table"? Just doing > > insert into tabb select * from temptable > yup, that's exactly what I mean -- this will give you more uniform insert performance (your temp table doesn't even need indexes). Every N records (say 10000) you send to permanent and truncate the temp table. Obviously, this is more fragile approach so weigh the pros/cons carefully. merlin
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: