""Merlin Moncure"" <merlin.moncure@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote > > Running from remote, Time progression is: > First 50k: 20 sec > Second : 29 sec > [...] > final: : 66 sec > This may due to the maintainence cost of a big transaction, I am not sure ... Tom? > so, clear upward progression of time/rec. Initial time is 2.5k > inserts/sec which is decent but not great for such a narrow table. CPU > time on server starts around 50% and drops in exact proportion to insert > performance. My earlier gprof test also suggest there is no smoking gun > sucking down all the cpu time. > Not to 100%, so this means the server is always starving. It is waiting on something -- of couse not lock. That's why I think there is some problem on network communication. Another suspect will be the write - I knwo NTFS system will issue an internal log when extending a file. To remove the second suspect, I will try to hack the source to do a "fake" write ... Regards, Qingqing
