On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 02:39:37PM +0000, Frits Jalvingh wrote: > Hi all, > > Thanks a lot for the many responses! > > About preparing statements: this is done properly in Java, and pgsql does > it by itself. So that cannot be done better ;) > > I tried the copy command, and that indeed works quite brilliantly: > Inserted 24000000 rows in 22004 milliseconds, 1090710.7798582076 rows per > second > > That's faster than Oracle. But with a very bad interface I have to say for > normal database work.. I will try to make this work in the tooling, but it > needs some very special code to format all possible values properly, and to > manage the end of the copy, so it is not usable in general which is a pity, > I think. > > So, I am still very interested in getting normal inserts faster, because > that will gain speed for all work.. If Oracle can do it, and Postgres is > able to insert fast with copy- where lies the bottleneck with the insert > command? There seems to be quite a performance hit with the JDBC driver > itself (as the stored procedure is a lot faster), so I can look into that. > But even after that there is quite a gap.. > > Regards, > > Frits Hi Frits, Have you looked at UNLOGGED tables and also having more that 1 insert stream running at a time. Sometimes multiple parallel inserts can be faster. Regards, Ken -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
