Re: Postgres INSERT performance and scalability

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Stephen Frost
Тема
Re: Postgres INSERT performance and scalability
Дата
Msg-id
20110920011551.GQ12765@tamriel.snowman.net
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Postgres INSERT performance and scalability Igor Chudov <ichudov@gmail.com>
Re: Postgres INSERT performance and scalability Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Re: Postgres INSERT performance and scalability Jon Nelson <jnelson+pgsql@jamponi.net>
Re: Postgres INSERT performance and scalability Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Re: Postgres INSERT performance and scalability Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au>
Re: Postgres INSERT performance and scalability Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
Re: Postgres INSERT performance and scalability Igor Chudov <ichudov@gmail.com>
Re: Postgres INSERT performance and scalability Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
* Igor Chudov (ichudov@gmail.com) wrote:
> Well, my question is, rather, whether the time to do a bulk INSERT of N
> records into a large table, would take substantially longer than a bulk
> insert of N records into a small table. In other words, does the populating
> time grow as the table gets more and more rows?

Oh, in that regard, the answer would generally be 'no'.  PostgreSQL
maintains a table known as the 'free space map', where it keeps track of
where there is 'free space' to insert data into a table.  As someone
else mentioned, if there's a lot of indexes then it's possible that the
increased depth in the index due to the larger number of tuples might
mean the larger table is slower, but I don't think it'd make a huge
difference, to be honest...

Are you seeing that behavior?  There's nothing like testing it to see
exactly what happens, of course..

	Thanks,

		Stephen
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления
От: Igor Chudov
Дата:
От: Jon Nelson
Дата:
FAQ