afaik, this should be completely neglectable. starting a transaction implies write access. if there is none, You do not need to think about transactions, because there are none. postgres needs to schedule the writing transactions with the reading ones, anyway. But I am not that performance profession anyway ;-) regards, Marcus -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: pgsql-performance-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Im Auftrag von Markus Schaber Gesendet: Dienstag, 20. Dezember 2005 11:41 An: PostgreSQL Performance List Betreff: [PERFORM] Read only transactions - Commit or Rollback Hello, We have a database containing PostGIS MAP data, it is accessed mainly via JDBC. There are multiple simultaneous read-only connections taken from the JBoss connection pooling, and there usually are no active writers. We use connection.setReadOnly(true). Now my question is what is best performance-wise, if it does make any difference at all: Having autocommit on or off? (I presume "off") Using commit or rollback? Committing / rolling back occasionally (e. G. when returning the connection to the pool) or not at all (until the pool closes the connection)? Thanks, Markus -- Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS Fight against software patents in EU! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
