On 2016/05/31 14:53, Amit Langote wrote:
On 2016/05/30 22:59, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 30 May 2016 at 16:17, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
That's a good point, but the basic idea is to send the local query
almost-as-is to the remote server if possible. For example, if the local
query is "INSERT INTO f
On 2016/05/30 22:59, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 30 May 2016 at 16:17, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>>
>> That's a good point, but the basic idea is to send the local query
>> almost-as-is to the remote server if possible. For example, if the local
>> query is "INSERT INTO foreign_table(a,b,c) VALUES (1, 2,
On 30 May 2016 at 16:17, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>
> That's a good point, but the basic idea is to send the local query
> almost-as-is to the remote server if possible. For example, if the local
> query is "INSERT INTO foreign_table(a,b,c) VALUES (1, 2, 3), (4, 5, 6)",
> send the remote query "INS
On 2016/05/27 8:49, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
Honestly, I didn't have any idea for executing such an insert efficiently,
but I was thinking to execute an insert into a foreign table efficiently, by
sending the whole insert to the remote serve
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> On 2016/05/18 7:08, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Manuel Kniep wrote:
>>>
>>> I realized that inserts into foreign tables are only done row by row.
>>> Consider copying data from one local table to a foreign t
On 2016/05/18 7:08, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Manuel Kniep wrote:
I realized that inserts into foreign tables are only done row by row.
Consider copying data from one local table to a foreign table with
INSERT INTO foreign_table(a,b,c) SELECT a,b,c FROM local_tabl
On 20 May 2016 at 23:18, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 20 May 2016 at 15:35, Craig Ringer wrote:
>
>
>>
>> You can, however, omit Sync from between messages and send a series of
>> protocol messages, like
>>
>> Parse/Bind/Execute/Bind/Execute/Bind/Execute/Sync
>>
>> to avoid round-trip overheads.
>>
On 20 May 2016 at 15:35, Craig Ringer wrote:
>
> You can, however, omit Sync from between messages and send a series of
> protocol messages, like
>
> Parse/Bind/Execute/Bind/Execute/Bind/Execute/Sync
>
> to avoid round-trip overheads.
>
>
I implemented what I think is a pretty solid proof of con
On 20 May 2016 at 08:47, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:
> pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Craig Ringer
>
> Well, there's FE/BE level batching/pipelining already. Just no access to
> it from libpq.
>
>
>
> Oh, really. The Bind ('B')
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Craig Ringer
Well, there's FE/BE level batching/pipelining already. Just no access to it
from libpq.
Oh, really. The Bind ('B') appears to take one set of parameter values, not
multiple sets (arra
On 19 May 2016 at 14:08, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
>
>
> Yes, I want FE-BE protocol-level batch inserts/updates/deletes, too. I
> was just about to start thinking of how to implement it because of recent
> user question in pgsql-odbc. The OP uses Microsoft SQL Server Integration
> Service (SS
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Craig Ringer
On 19 May 2016 at 01:39, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 18 May 2016 at 06:08, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> > Wouldn’t it make sense to d
On 19 May 2016 at 01:39, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Craig Ringer
> wrote:
> > On 18 May 2016 at 06:08, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
> >> > Wouldn’t it make sense to do the insert batch wise e.g. 100 rows ?
> >>
> >> Using a single query string with multiple values, p
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 18 May 2016 at 06:08, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> > Wouldn’t it make sense to do the insert batch wise e.g. 100 rows ?
>>
>> Using a single query string with multiple values, perhaps, but after
>> that comes into consideration query string
On 18 May 2016 at 06:08, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Wouldn’t it make sense to do the insert batch wise e.g. 100 rows ?
>
> Using a single query string with multiple values, perhaps, but after
> that comes into consideration query string limit particularly for
> large text values... The query use
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Manuel Kniep wrote:
> I realized that inserts into foreign tables are only done row by row.
> Consider copying data from one local table to a foreign table with
>
> INSERT INTO foreign_table(a,b,c) SELECT a,b,c FROM local_table;
>
> When the foreign server is for
Hi,
I realized that inserts into foreign tables are only done row by row.
Consider copying data from one local table to a foreign table with
INSERT INTO foreign_table(a,b,c) SELECT a,b,c FROM local_table;
When the foreign server is for example in another datacenter with long latency,
this as an
17 matches
Mail list logo
