On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Depends. Got any indexes? The more indexes you have to update theOn Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Igor Chudov <ichudov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Let's say that I want to do INSERT SELECT of 1,000 items into a table. The
> table has some ints, varchars, TEXT and BLOB fields.
> Would the time that it takes, differ a great deal, depending on whether the
> table has only 100,000 or 5,000,000 records?
slower it's gonna be. You can test this, it's easy to create test
rows like so:
insert into test select generate_series(1,10000);
etc. There's lots of examples floating around on how to do that. So,
make yourself a couple of tables and test it.
Well, my question is, rather, whether the time to do a bulk INSERT of N records into a large table, would take substantially longer than a bulk insert of N records into a small table. In other words, does the populating time grow as the table gets more and more rows?
i
