Horton

Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq

Gavin Flower <gavinflower@archidevsys.co.nz>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Gavin Flower <GavinFlower@archidevsys.co.nz>
To: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Daniel Verite <daniel@manitou-mail.org>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>, Dmitry Igrishin <dmitigr@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Manuel Kniep <m.kniep@web.de>, "fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp" <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date: 2016-10-04T08:39:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 04/10/16 20:15, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Daniel Verite <daniel@manitou-mail.org> wrote:
>> Wouldn't pgbench benefit from it?
>> It was mentioned some time ago [1], in relationship to the
>> \into construct, how client-server latency was important enough to
>> justify the use of a "\;" separator between statements, to send them
>> as a group.
>>
>> But with the libpq batch API, maybe this could be modernized
>> with meta-commands like this:
>>    \startbatch
>>    ...
>>    \endbatch
> Or just \batch [on|off], which sounds like a damn good idea to me for
> some users willing to test some workloads before integrating it in an
> application.

+1

'\batch' is a bit easier, to find, & to remember than '\startbatch'

Commits

  1. Add libpq pipeline mode support to pgbench

  2. Implement pipeline mode in libpq