On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Claudio Freire <klaussfre...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> Such a thing would help COPY, so maybe it's worth a look > > I have little doubt that a deferred insertion buffer of some kind > could help performance on some workloads, though I suspect the buffer > would have to be pretty big to make it worthwhile on a big COPY that > generates mostly-random insertions. I think the question is not so > much whether it's worth doing but where anyone's going to find the > time to do it.
However, since an admin can increase work_mem for that COPY, using work_mem for this would be reasonable, don't you agree? -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
