Day, David wrote > Hoping for a teachable moment :+) 2-3 of them apparently... > Why is the commit duration so large in [704-1] and the work was done ? in > [703-1] greatly simplified but: COMMIT means - "write to disk"; this is expensive. In a transaction (see below) the statements can be run fairly quickly because they are not guaranteed to be written to disk until you issue a commit. > Autocommit is enabled for the session, would not any commit work have > completed on the return from the select ? > ( I thought functions were auto-commit ? , I also note that the > table_maintenance function returns VOID. You issued an explicit BEGIN - it doesn't matter what you auto-commit mode is set to at this point. It may be your middleware that is sending the BEGIN, not you, but the end result is the same. > When attached locally to the server and running the same command from the > psql shell I observe: > > ace_db=# explain analyze select log.table_maintenance(); > QUERY PLAN > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Result (cost=0.00..0.26 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=1.433..1.439 rows=1 > loops=1) > Total runtime: 1.550 ms > (2 rows) If you mean to compare the 1.55ms to the 109+ms that is going to be difficult since you haven't setup a controlled experiment; or more specifically at minimum run the queries many times and calculate an average value to compare. David J. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/puzzled-by-commit-Logging-statement-duration-tp5817447p5817474.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
