Javier de la Torre wrote: > Yes, > > Thanks. I am doing this now... > > Is definetly faster, but I will also discover now if there is a limit > in a transaction side... I am going to try to insert into one single > transaction 60 million records in a table. > > In any case I still don't understand how why PostgreSQL was not taking > resources before without the transaction. If it has to create a > transaction per insert I understand it will have to do more things, > but why is not taking all resources from the machine? I mean, why is > it only taking 3% of them. > I'll bet your WAL disk is mostly WAIT-I/O, waiting for the WAL log flushes at end of transaction. LER -- Larry Rosenman Database Support Engineer PERVASIVE SOFTWARE. INC. 12365B RIATA TRACE PKWY 3015 AUSTIN TX 78727-6531 Tel: 512.231.6173 Fax: 512.231.6597 Email: Larry.Rosenman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Web: www.pervasive.com
