Re: WAL + SSD = slow inserts?

From: bricklen <bricklen(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Skarsol <skarsol(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WAL + SSD = slow inserts?
Date: 2013-12-05 19:19:26
Message-ID: CAGrpgQ8HHvp8Z_SGAFZ1VXu90eGS8c3vbaDn7PD8xS4j8LGL8w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:

> Rules have a lot of overhead. Is there a reason you're not using
> defaults or triggers?
>

Or for even less overhead, load the partitions directly, and preferably use
"DEFAULT nextval('some_sequence')" as Scott mentioned.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2013-12-05 20:29:35 Re: Explain analyze time overhead
Previous Message Claudio Freire 2013-12-05 18:13:51 Re: Parallel Select query performance and shared buffers