Bulk Inserts

On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 12:58:59PM +0200, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> On 2005-07-19 14:49:57 +0530, Kiran Kumar wrote:
> > We could have an option to do Bulk Inserts ..
>
> Seconded. Actually, DBIv1 already has it (look for bind_param_array in
> the manual),

And execute_array() and execute_for_fetch().

> but I think support in the DBDs is still not very good

The DBI emulates the behaviour for drivers that don't have native support,
so you can go ahead and use it in applications.

> (there was a patch for DBD::Oracle, but if that ever was included in the
> official release, I missed the announcement).

There were problems with the patch. It's not been resubmitted yet.

Tim.

Re: Bulk Inserts

--2hMgfIw2X+zgXrFs
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2005-08-16 14:22:26 +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 12:58:59PM +0200, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > On 2005-07-19 14:49:57 +0530, Kiran Kumar wrote:
> > > We could have an option to do Bulk Inserts ..
> > Seconded. Actually, DBIv1 already has it (look for bind_param_array in
> > the manual),
>=20
> And execute_array() and execute_for_fetch().
>=20
> > but I think support in the DBDs is still not very good
>=20
> The DBI emulates the behaviour for drivers that don't have native support,
> so you can go ahead and use it in applications.

Yes, but unless the driver has native support, you won't see much
speedup. So the incentive to use it isn't that great.

hp

--=20
_ | Peter J. Holzer | In our modern say,learn,know in a day
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | world, perhaps being an expert is an
| | | hjp@wsr.ac.at | outdated concept.
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- Catharine Drozdowski on dbi-users.

--2hMgfIw2X+zgXrFs
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iQDQAwUBQwRi8VLjemazOuKpAQGsRQXUDC3sdt8KRObHog1LFxSYs6yAgsHh Gl2y
c5cMOfRqkiWhdD2Dbf5S5bJZJUnZ3OaxYl3ImuVEV0Ak7SyCQtAuR63LxLg9 q4Mq
jAVaowLl+B/3KF3YiIQZ8x/lOtucLfUj8gQ9Uu73cicncG2V+CI/xLsgvhuL HNUL
BUWpFt91UpnriaWp/+QCMwAu1xYKjiLJtSnYzYLfLRvcaAMFUuXN3t79/WfK ctAj
nAfF0cF3+CLnIjX66keyedWOTg==
=cnsT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--2hMgfIw2X+zgXrFs--

Re: Bulk Inserts

On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 12:29:06PM +0200, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> On 2005-08-16 14:22:26 +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 12:58:59PM +0200, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > > On 2005-07-19 14:49:57 +0530, Kiran Kumar wrote:
> > > > We could have an option to do Bulk Inserts ..
> > > Seconded. Actually, DBIv1 already has it (look for bind_param_array in
> > > the manual),
> >
> > And execute_array() and execute_for_fetch().
> >
> > > but I think support in the DBDs is still not very good
> >
> > The DBI emulates the behaviour for drivers that don't have native support,
> > so you can go ahead and use it in applications.
>
> Yes, but unless the driver has native support, you won't see much
> speedup. So the incentive to use it isn't that great.

Sure. Use it, then send a patch to the driver author to add in native
support, and help save the world. If the driver author doesn't have the
itch to fix it then someone who has should do so.

Tim.