Re: Benchmark Data requested

[Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>]

Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 15:06 +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> > Le lundi 04 février 2008, Jignesh K. Shah a écrit :

> > > Multiple table loads ( 1 per table) spawned via script  is bit better
> > > but hits wal problems.
> > pgloader will too hit the WAL problem, but it still may have its benefits, or 
> > at least we will soon (you can already if you take it from CVS) be able to 
> > measure if the parallel loading at the client side is a good idea perf. wise.
>
> Should be able to reduce lock contention, but not overall WAL volume.

In the case of a bulk upload to an empty table (or partition?) could you 
not optimise the WAL away? That is, shouldn't the WAL basically be a 
simple transformation of the on-disk blocks? You'd have to explicitly 
sync the file(s) for the table/indexes of course, and you'd need some 
work-around for WAL shipping, but it might be worth it for you chaps 
with large imports.

--
  Richard Huxton
  Archonet Ltd