Re: non-bulk inserts and tuple routing - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>
> * Bulk-inserting 100,000 rows using COPY:
>
> copy t1 from '/tmp/t1.csv' csv;
>
> * Times in milliseconds:
>
> #parts           HEAD        Patched
>
>      8        458.301        450.875
>     16        409.271        510.723
>     32        500.960        612.003
>     64        430.687        795.046
>    128        449.314        565.786
>    256        493.171        490.187

While the earlier numbers were monotonically increasing with number of
partitions, these numbers don't. For example the number on HEAD with 8
partitions is higher than that with 128 partitions as well. That's
kind of wierd. May be something wrong with the measurement. Do we see
similar unstability when bulk inserting in an unpartitioned table?
Also, the numbers against 64 partitions are really bad. That's almost
2x slower.

-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company