On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Will Rutherdale (rutherw) <rutherw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I see. Perhaps earlier I alienated some people by talking about > transactions per second, which is not necessarily an appropriate unit. Hard to say, tps is still important. A lot of loads need to change one thing in a transaction and change it fairly fast. A lot of other loads update / insert 10,000 rows, and tps doesn't mean as much as rows inserted / second. I doubt anybody took it personally though. More likely just got confused over what you and they were measuring. Storytime! One of my best friends came from MSSQL and MySQL shop, and when introduced him to pgsql, he was bitching at how slow this file full of inserts was inserting. This was in the pg 7.0 days, when pg was not super fast, but quite fast enough if you knew a few basic tricks of the trade. I looked at his load file, which was basically one insert after another, 10k of them. I pushed him aside, typed in begin; on top and commit; on the bottom and told him to run it now. It finished in about 10 seconds. It had taken > 10 minutes before that. He's now my boss at another company, and pretty hard core pgsql fan. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
