| From: | "Ed L(dot)" <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: insert performance riddle |
| Date: | 2005-08-11 21:29:29 |
| Message-ID: | 200508111529.29046.pgsql@bluepolka.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thursday August 11 2005 1:37 pm, Michael Fuhr wrote:
> Have you done any client-side tests that eliminate Perl? I'd
> suggest writing a little C program so you can measure libpq's
> performance without the extra layers of Perl and DBI/DBD::Pg.
> Test both local (Unix socket) and network (IPv4 or IPv6
> socket) connections.
Michael, you nailed it again. My libpq test C program delivered
between 2400 QPS and 5000 QPS vs ~10 QPS for DBI/DBD::Pg on this
box.
It remains unclear to me why the same DBI/DBD::Pg client code
would deliver performance 2-3 orders of magnitude better on
other roughly comparable or inferior boxes.
What would be the recommended replacement for DBI/DBD::Pg as a
perl interface?
Thanks,
Ed
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-08-11 21:44:45 | Re: No PUBLIC access by default? |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-08-11 21:13:10 | Re: plphp crashing server |