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: | 2005-08-12 23:20:49 |
Message-ID: | 200508121720.49799.pgsql@bluepolka.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thursday August 11 2005 6:20 pm, Michael Fuhr wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 03:29:29PM -0600, Ed L. wrote:
> > 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.
>
> I'd suggest contacting the module's maintainer -- see the
> AUTHORS section of the DBD::Pg manual page for contact info.
Well, just as I thought I had this one pinned, my test results
have become wildly inconsistent, eroding all confidence in my
prior conclusions about DBI slowness, etc. I've seen at least
1000+ QPS performance via DBI/DBD::Pg, Pg, and C/libpq. I'm now
investigating the possibility of simple old intermittent I/O
congestion...
Ed
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Fuhr | 2005-08-12 23:27:12 | Re: insert performance riddle |
Previous Message | Chris Travers | 2005-08-12 23:13:04 | Re: Seeking PL/PGSQL example |