Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> We don't get to skip wal of course, but we should be able to use a >> bulk insert strategy, especially if there was some way of predicting >> that a large number of tuples were going to be inserted. I'm >> wondering though of contention on the free list is in fact the OP's >> problem.
> Not sure. It might be some other LWLock, but it's hard to tell which > one from the information provided. Yeah. It seems quite plausible that Robert's select-only benchmark might be mainly tripping over the freelist lock, but I'm less convinced about something that's doing INSERT/SELECT, and therefore is also doing a lot of WAL activity, index insertions, etc. I'd want to see some instrumentation results before assuming we know where the bottleneck is there. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers