> 1. There is no difference (speed-wise) between committing every 1K or every 250K rows.
It was really some time ago, since I have experimented with this. My las experiment was on PG 7.2 or 7.3. I was inserting cca 800,000 rows. Inserting without transactions took 25 hrs. Inserting with 10,000 rows per transaction took about 2.5 hrs. So, the speedup was 10x. I have not experimented with the transaction batch size, but I suspect that 1,000 would not show much speedup.
> 2. Vacuuming also makes no difference for a heavy insert-only table, only slows it down.
Makes sense. Since my application was dumping all records each month and inserting new ones, vacuum was really needed, but no speedup.
> 3. Table size plays no real factor.
The reason I saw speedup, must have to do with the fact that without transactions, each insert was it's own transaction. That was eating resources.It was really some time ago, since I have experimented with this. My las experiment was on PG 7.2 or 7.3. I was inserting cca 800,000 rows. Inserting without transactions took 25 hrs. Inserting with 10,000 rows per transaction took about 2.5 hrs. So, the speedup was 10x. I have not experimented with the transaction batch size, but I suspect that 1,000 would not show much speedup.
> 2. Vacuuming also makes no difference for a heavy insert-only table, only slows it down.
Makes sense. Since my application was dumping all records each month and inserting new ones, vacuum was really needed, but no speedup.
> 3. Table size plays no real factor.
Nix.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
