On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 04:43:15PM +0200, 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. Because a server has more than just CPU as a resource. In this case you were undoubtedly limited by the drives that pg_xlog is on. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
