Re: performance for high-volume log insertion

david(at)lang(dot)hm wrote:
>>> 2. insert into table values (),(),(),()
>>
>> Using this structure would be more database agnostic, but won't perform
>> as well as the COPY options I don't believe. It might be interesting to
>> do a large "insert into table values (),(),()" as a prepared statement,
>> but then you'd have to have different sizes for each different number of
>> items you want inserted.
>
> on the other hand, when you have a full queue (lots of stuff to
> insert) is when you need the performance the most. if it's enough of a
> win on the database side, it could be worth more effort on the
> applicaiton side.
Are you sure preparing a simple insert is really worthwhile?

I'd check if I were you. It shouldn't take long to plan.

Note that this structure (above) is handy but not universal.

You might want to try:

insert into table
select (...)
union
select (...)
union
select (...)
...

as well, since its more univeral. Works on Sybase and SQLServer for
example (and v.quickly too - much more so than a TSQL batch with lots of
inserts or execs of stored procs)

James