From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: COPY FROM STDIN instead of INSERT |
Date: | 2006-10-18 15:14:42 |
Message-ID: | 20061018151442.GD31297@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Ron Johnson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/18/06 09:47, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > On 10/18/06, Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> wrote:
> >> > I tested binary quite a bit and only found it to be a win if moving
> >> > blobs in and out of the database. On 'normal' tables of mixed fields
> >> > types of small size, it can actually be slower. Binary is a bit
> >> > faster for native types and bytea, and slower for character types.
> >>
> >> "native types"?
> >
> > types operated on directly by the processor. int2, int4, int8, float4,
> > and float8, and their various aliases :).
> >
> > in short, i think using binary for anything other than bytea is a
> > waste of effort/time, except for bytea.
>
> That's counter-intuitive, since you'd (well, I'd) think that doing a
> binary copy would be faster since the code would bypass the int-to-
> ascii conversion.
Yeah, but on the other hand it has to do the htonl/ntohl conversion.
(I'd guess that should be faster than the text-to-int anyway ...)
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2006-10-18 15:54:31 | Re: COPY FROM STDIN instead of INSERT |
Previous Message | Ron Johnson | 2006-10-18 15:12:50 | Re: COPY FROM STDIN instead of INSERT |