The Hermit Hacker wrote: > On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Tom Lane wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > I was just testing the threaded ecpg, and ran some performance tests. > > > > Without using threads, I am seeing 100,000 inserts of a single word into > > > > a simple table take 12 seconds: > > > > CREATE TABLE test_thread(message TEXT); > > > > giving me 8333 inserts per second. That seems very high. > > > > > > Single transaction, or one transaction per INSERT? > > > > This is ecpg, and I didn't have AUTOCOMMIT on, so it was a single > > transaction. I had forgotten that. > > > > Also, I was wrong in my computations. It is 4166 inserts per second, > > not 8333. Sorry. > > > > I am now seeing more reasonable numbers: > > > > one INSERT per transaction, fsync true 934 > > one INSERT per transaction, fsync false 1818 > > one INSERT per transaction, fsync true 4166 > > Shouldn't 1 and 3 be about the same though? If both are 'one INSERT per > transaction with fsync true', how come such a massive difference in #s?
Man, I can't do anything right; should be: one INSERT per transaction, fsync true 934 one INSERT per transaction, fsync false 1818 INSERTs all in one transaction, fsync true 4166 -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]