From owner-pgsql-general@hub.org Fri Dec 18 06:31:23 1998 Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4]) by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id GAA05554 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 06:31:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from hub.org (majordom@hub.org [209.47.145.100]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$Revision: 1.8 $) with ESMTP id EAA21127 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 04:46:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (majordom@localhost) by hub.org (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id EAA01409; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 04:44:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from owner-pgsql-general@hub.org) Received: by hub.org (TLB v0.10a (1.23 tibbs 1997/01/09 00:29:32)); Fri, 18 Dec 1998 04:43:22 +0000 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.org (8.9.1/8.9.1) id EAA01093 for pgsql-general-outgoing; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 04:43:18 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from owner-pgsql-general@postgreSQL.org) Received: from dune.krs.ru (dune.krs.ru [195.161.16.38]) by hub.org (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA01067 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 04:43:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from vadim@krs.ru) Received: from krs.ru (localhost.krs.ru [127.0.0.1]) by dune.krs.ru (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16201; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:41:44 +0700 (KRS) (envelope-from vadim@krs.ru) Message-ID: <367A2354.E998763@krs.ru> Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:41:40 +0700 From: Vadim Mikheev Organization: OJSC Rostelecom (Krasnoyarsk) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2.6-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: ru, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Anton de Wet CC: pgsql-general@postgreSQL.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Why PostgreSQL is better than other commerial softwares? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-pgsql-general@postgreSQL.org Precedence: bulk Status: RO Anton de Wet wrote: > > > > > Often quick mailing list support? > > :-) > > While on the subject I finally found the solution to a problem I (and one > or two other people) posted about without answer. (So sometimes it's slow > mailing list support). > > In importing about 5 million records (which I copy in blocks of 10000) the > copy became linearly slower. After a friend RTFM and refered me, I used > the -F switch (passed by the postmaster to the backend processes) and the > time became linear and a LOT shorter. Import time for the 5000000 records > now the same (or maybe even slightly faster, I didn't accurately time > them) as importing the data into oracle on the same machine. "While on the subject..." -:) This is the problem of buffer manager, known for very long time: when copy eats all buffers, manager begins write/fsync each durty buffer to free buffer for new data. All updated relations should be fsynced _once_ @ transaction commit. You would get the same results without -F... I still have no time to implement this -:( Vadim