Well instead of creating a temp table everytime i just created a permanant table and insert the data into it everytime and truncate it. I created indexes on this permanent table too. This did improve the performance to some extent.
Does using permanant tables also bloat the catalog or hinder the performance? Thanks Samantha On 4/8/08, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > samantha mahindrakar escribió: > > > So the program necessarily creates a temporary table evrytime it has > > to correct a record. However this table is dropeed after each record > > is corrected. > > Perhaps it would be better to truncate the temp table instead. > > > Iam not sure if i can use a cursor to replicate the functionality of > > the temp table. Is the performance bad because of the creation and > > deletion of the temp table? > > Yes -- if you create/drop thousands of temp tables (or create/drop the > same temp table thousands of time), the resulting catalog bloat is > likely to hinder performance. Perhaps autovacuum should be at work here > (and if not you can solve the issue with manual vacuums to the system > catalogs), but even then it is at best unnecessary. > > -- > Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ > The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. > -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
