On Monday 04 April 2005 18:45, Matt White wrote: > Matt White wrote: > > For PostgreSQL, there is one other thing I can think of that might be > > done to speed things up...single sql statements are executed with an > > implicit BEGIN TRANSACTION/END TRANSACTION. If it's doable without > > affecting the other databases, would you be receptive to a patch to > > wrap the inserts in a transaction (probably a new transaction every > > 1000 or 5000 records or so). I just ran a very quick test: > > > > CREATE TABLE testing ( > > num1 int8 PRIMARY KEY NOT NULL, > > num2 int8); > > > > Script 1: test bare insert and update: > > loop from 0-1000, do an insert of num1 then update num2 with random # > > > > testins 0.33s user 0.20s system 1% cpu 47.331 total > > > > Script 2: wrap loop from above script with a begin/end transaction > > block: > > > > testtrans 0.07s user 0.03s system 5% cpu 1.845 total > > Duh. Never mind, just found the existing transaction stuff that's > in there already...
The existing transaction code does NOT work for simultaneous job. Please don't even think about trying to use it unless you turn it on *only* when one job is running. -- Best regards, Kern ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
