On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Daniele Varrazzo
<daniele.varrazzo@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Idan Kamara <idankk86@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> When using executemany to do a bulk insert, psycopg2 generates an
>> INSERT for each item in the given sequence of items.
>>
>> This is a lot slower than a single INSERT using Postgres multirow
>> VALUES syntax, e.g.
>>
>> INSERT INTO films (code, title, did, date_prod, kind) VALUES
>> ('B6717', 'Tampopo', 110, '1985-02-10', 'Comedy'),
>> ('HG120', 'The Dinner Game', 140, DEFAULT, 'Comedy');
>>
>> Why doesn't psycopg2 use this syntax?
>
> Because psycopg's role is not to generate sql, but only to talk with
> the database and to convert python types in sql syntax and back.
Fair enough, it should perhaps be noted on executemany that this
is the intended behavior.
>
> You can easily generate a string such as "INSERT INTO films (...)
> VALUES %s, %s, %s ..." with n placeholders and pass n tuples as
> argument: psycopg will convert the entire tuple in a syntax understood
> by postgres.
>
> In [15]: data = [
> ('B6717', 'Tampopo', 110, date(1985,02,10), 'Comedy'),
> ('HG120', 'The Dinner Game', 140, None, 'Comedy')]
>
> In [18]: cur.mogrify("insert into foo values " + ','.join(["%s"] *
> len(data)), data)
> Out[18]: "insert into foo values ('B6717', 'Tampopo', 110,
> '1985-02-10'::date, 'Comedy'),('HG120', 'The Dinner Game', 140, NULL,
> 'Comedy')"
>
> But the "connective tissue" of the query must be generated by the
> application, or by some higher level library you may decide to use.
Yes, I'll take this up to sqlqlchemy and deal with it there.
>
> Also note that the fastest way to insert values in the db is to use
> COPY. In that area I'd say psycopg could do more, e.g. it would be
> great to use a sequence of python tuples in place of a file-like
> object to use as copy source, but that takes an entirely different
> adaptation infrastructure in place.
>
> -- Daniele