Efficient way to do batch INSERTS with JDBC












52















In my app I need to do a lot of INSERTS. Its a Java app and I am using plain JDBC to execute the queries. The DB being Oracle. I have enabled batching though, so it saves me network latencies to execute queries. But the queries execute serially as separate INSERTs:



insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val1, val2)
insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val3, val4)
insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val5, val6)


I was wondering if the following form of INSERT might be more efficient:



insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val1, val2), (val3, val4), (val5, val6)


i.e. collapsing multiple INSERTs into one.



Any other tips for making batch INSERTs faster?










share|improve this question




















  • 2





    WOW! I tested your "collapse multiple inserts into one" while inserting to SQL Server, and I went from 107 rows/second to 3333 rows per second!

    – Wouter
    Nov 7 '16 at 16:03






  • 1





    That's a stunning 31x increase.

    – gaurav
    Aug 13 '18 at 11:06
















52















In my app I need to do a lot of INSERTS. Its a Java app and I am using plain JDBC to execute the queries. The DB being Oracle. I have enabled batching though, so it saves me network latencies to execute queries. But the queries execute serially as separate INSERTs:



insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val1, val2)
insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val3, val4)
insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val5, val6)


I was wondering if the following form of INSERT might be more efficient:



insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val1, val2), (val3, val4), (val5, val6)


i.e. collapsing multiple INSERTs into one.



Any other tips for making batch INSERTs faster?










share|improve this question




















  • 2





    WOW! I tested your "collapse multiple inserts into one" while inserting to SQL Server, and I went from 107 rows/second to 3333 rows per second!

    – Wouter
    Nov 7 '16 at 16:03






  • 1





    That's a stunning 31x increase.

    – gaurav
    Aug 13 '18 at 11:06














52












52








52


24






In my app I need to do a lot of INSERTS. Its a Java app and I am using plain JDBC to execute the queries. The DB being Oracle. I have enabled batching though, so it saves me network latencies to execute queries. But the queries execute serially as separate INSERTs:



insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val1, val2)
insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val3, val4)
insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val5, val6)


I was wondering if the following form of INSERT might be more efficient:



insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val1, val2), (val3, val4), (val5, val6)


i.e. collapsing multiple INSERTs into one.



Any other tips for making batch INSERTs faster?










share|improve this question
















In my app I need to do a lot of INSERTS. Its a Java app and I am using plain JDBC to execute the queries. The DB being Oracle. I have enabled batching though, so it saves me network latencies to execute queries. But the queries execute serially as separate INSERTs:



insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val1, val2)
insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val3, val4)
insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val5, val6)


I was wondering if the following form of INSERT might be more efficient:



insert into some_table (col1, col2) values (val1, val2), (val3, val4), (val5, val6)


i.e. collapsing multiple INSERTs into one.



Any other tips for making batch INSERTs faster?







java sql performance jdbc






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Sep 24 '10 at 10:11









Bozho

485k1089521064




485k1089521064










asked Sep 24 '10 at 4:29









Aayush PuriAayush Puri

7441918




7441918








  • 2





    WOW! I tested your "collapse multiple inserts into one" while inserting to SQL Server, and I went from 107 rows/second to 3333 rows per second!

    – Wouter
    Nov 7 '16 at 16:03






  • 1





    That's a stunning 31x increase.

    – gaurav
    Aug 13 '18 at 11:06














  • 2





    WOW! I tested your "collapse multiple inserts into one" while inserting to SQL Server, and I went from 107 rows/second to 3333 rows per second!

    – Wouter
    Nov 7 '16 at 16:03






  • 1





    That's a stunning 31x increase.

    – gaurav
    Aug 13 '18 at 11:06








2




2





WOW! I tested your "collapse multiple inserts into one" while inserting to SQL Server, and I went from 107 rows/second to 3333 rows per second!

– Wouter
Nov 7 '16 at 16:03





WOW! I tested your "collapse multiple inserts into one" while inserting to SQL Server, and I went from 107 rows/second to 3333 rows per second!

– Wouter
Nov 7 '16 at 16:03




1




1





That's a stunning 31x increase.

– gaurav
Aug 13 '18 at 11:06





That's a stunning 31x increase.

– gaurav
Aug 13 '18 at 11:06












9 Answers
9






active

oldest

votes


















108














This is a mix of the two previous answers:



  PreparedStatement ps = c.prepareStatement("INSERT INTO employees VALUES (?, ?)");

ps.setString(1, "John");
ps.setString(2,"Doe");
ps.addBatch();

ps.clearParameters();
ps.setString(1, "Dave");
ps.setString(2,"Smith");
ps.addBatch();

ps.clearParameters();
int results = ps.executeBatch();





share|improve this answer





















  • 3





    This is perfect solutions as statement is prepared (parsed) only once.

    – Ashish Patil
    Sep 24 '10 at 12:06






  • 30





    The ps.clearParameters(); is unnecessary in this particular case.

    – BalusC
    Sep 24 '10 at 12:21











  • Be sure to measure it. Depending on the JDBC driver's implementation this might be the expected one roundtrip per batch but can also end up being one roundtrip per statement.

    – stracktracer
    Jun 20 '14 at 0:00











  • prepareStatement/setXXX - that's the way it should be!

    – msciwoj
    Jul 8 '16 at 12:49



















16














Though the question asks inserting efficiently to Oracle using JDBC, I'm currently playing with DB2 (On IBM mainframe), conceptually inserting would be similar so thought it might be helpful to see my metrics between




  • inserting one record at a time


  • inserting a batch of records (very efficient)



Here go the metrics



1) Inserting one record at a time



public void writeWithCompileQuery(int records) {
PreparedStatement statement;

try {
Connection connection = getDatabaseConnection();
connection.setAutoCommit(true);

String compiledQuery = "INSERT INTO TESTDB.EMPLOYEE(EMPNO, EMPNM, DEPT, RANK, USERNAME)" +
" VALUES" + "(?, ?, ?, ?, ?)";
statement = connection.prepareStatement(compiledQuery);

long start = System.currentTimeMillis();

for(int index = 1; index < records; index++) {
statement.setInt(1, index);
statement.setString(2, "emp number-"+index);
statement.setInt(3, index);
statement.setInt(4, index);
statement.setString(5, "username");

long startInternal = System.currentTimeMillis();
statement.executeUpdate();
System.out.println("each transaction time taken = " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startInternal) + " ms");
}

long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("total time taken = " + (end - start) + " ms");
System.out.println("avg total time taken = " + (end - start)/ records + " ms");

statement.close();
connection.close();

} catch (SQLException ex) {
System.err.println("SQLException information");
while (ex != null) {
System.err.println("Error msg: " + ex.getMessage());
ex = ex.getNextException();
}
}
}


The metrics for 100 transactions :



each transaction time taken = 123 ms
each transaction time taken = 53 ms
each transaction time taken = 48 ms
each transaction time taken = 48 ms
each transaction time taken = 49 ms
each transaction time taken = 49 ms
...
..
.
each transaction time taken = 49 ms
each transaction time taken = 49 ms
total time taken = 4935 ms
avg total time taken = 49 ms


The first transaction is taking around 120-150ms which is for the query parse and then execution, the subsequent transactions are only taking around 50ms. (Which is still high, but my database is on a different server(I need to troubleshoot the network))




2) With insertion in a batch (efficient one) - achieved by preparedStatement.executeBatch()



public int writeInABatchWithCompiledQuery(int records) {
PreparedStatement preparedStatement;

try {
Connection connection = getDatabaseConnection();
connection.setAutoCommit(true);

String compiledQuery = "INSERT INTO TESTDB.EMPLOYEE(EMPNO, EMPNM, DEPT, RANK, USERNAME)" +
" VALUES" + "(?, ?, ?, ?, ?)";
preparedStatement = connection.prepareStatement(compiledQuery);

for(int index = 1; index <= records; index++) {
preparedStatement.setInt(1, index);
preparedStatement.setString(2, "empo number-"+index);
preparedStatement.setInt(3, index+100);
preparedStatement.setInt(4, index+200);
preparedStatement.setString(5, "usernames");
preparedStatement.addBatch();
}

long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
int inserted = preparedStatement.executeBatch();
long end = System.currentTimeMillis();

System.out.println("total time taken to insert the batch = " + (end - start) + " ms");
System.out.println("total time taken = " + (end - start)/records + " s");

preparedStatement.close();
connection.close();

return inserted;

} catch (SQLException ex) {
System.err.println("SQLException information");
while (ex != null) {
System.err.println("Error msg: " + ex.getMessage());
ex = ex.getNextException();
}
throw new RuntimeException("Error");
}
}


The metrics for a batch of 100 transactions is



total time taken to insert the batch = 127 ms


and for 1000 transactions



total time taken to insert the batch = 341 ms


So, making 100 transactions in ~5000ms (with one trxn at a time) is decreased to ~150ms (with a batch of 100 records).



NOTE - Ignore my network which is super slow, but the metrics values would be relative.






share|improve this answer





















  • 1





    Hi. Does the length of the record play a role in the time to insert ?? I have 3 Varchar columns with URIs as their values and inserting 8555 as a batch still takind ~3.5 min to insert !!

    – Prathamesh dhanawade
    Oct 30 '17 at 16:47











  • As per my understanding record size might matter during data transfer to database server from your application server but insertion time does not affect much. I tried in local oracle database with 3 columns of size 125 bytes and takes around (145 to 300) ms for batch of 10,000 records. Code here. While multiple transactions for 10,000 records takes 20seconds.

    – prayagupd
    Dec 16 '18 at 20:41



















6














The Statement gives you the following option:



Statement stmt = con.createStatement();

stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO employees VALUES (1000, 'Joe Jones')");
stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO departments VALUES (260, 'Shoe')");
stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO emp_dept VALUES (1000, 260)");

// submit a batch of update commands for execution
int updateCounts = stmt.executeBatch();





share|improve this answer



















  • 6





    While the end result is same, in this method, multiple statements are parsed, which is much slower for bulk, in fact not much efficient than executing each statement individually. Also please use PreparedStatement whenever possible for repeated queries as they perform much better..

    – Ashish Patil
    Sep 24 '10 at 12:09











  • @AshishPatil: do you have any benchmarks for testing with and without PreparedStatement?

    – gaurav
    Aug 13 '18 at 11:10











  • Whoa! After 8 years. Nevertheless, @prayagupd has given detailed stats in his answer which is much more recent. stackoverflow.com/a/42756134/372055

    – Ashish Patil
    Aug 13 '18 at 14:34



















4














You'll have to benchmark, obviously, but over JDBC issuing multiple inserts will be much faster if you use a PreparedStatement rather than a Statement.






share|improve this answer































    0














    How about using the INSERT ALL statement ?



    INSERT ALL

    INTO table_name VALUES ()

    INTO table_name VALUES ()

    ...

    SELECT Statement;


    I remember that the last select statement is mandatory in order to make this request succeed. Don't remember why though.
    You might consider using PreparedStatement instead as well. lots of advantages !



    Farid






    share|improve this answer































      0














      You can use addBatch and executeBatch for batch insert in java See the Example : Batch Insert In Java






      share|improve this answer































        0














        In my code I have no direct access to the 'preparedStatement' so I cannot use batch, I just pass it the query and a list of parameters. The trick however is to create a variable length insert statement, and a LinkedList of parameters. The effect is the same as the top example, with variable parameter input length.See below (error checking omitted).
        Assuming 'myTable' has 3 updatable fields: f1, f2 and f3



        String args={"A","B","C", "X","Y","Z" }; // etc, input list of triplets
        final String QUERY="INSERT INTO [myTable] (f1,f2,f3) values ";
        LinkedList params=new LinkedList();
        String comma="";
        StringBuilder q=QUERY;
        for(int nl=0; nl< args.length; nl+=3 ) { // args is a list of triplets values
        params.add(args[nl]);
        params.add(args[nl+1]);
        params.add(args[nl+2]);
        q.append(comma+"(?,?,?)");
        comma=",";
        }
        int nr=insertIntoDB(q, params);


        in my DBInterface class I have:



        int insertIntoDB(String query, LinkedList <String>params) {
        preparedUPDStmt = connectionSQL.prepareStatement(query);
        int n=1;
        for(String x:params) {
        preparedUPDStmt.setString(n++, x);
        }
        int updates=preparedUPDStmt.executeUpdate();
        return updates;
        }





        share|improve this answer































          -3














          Using PreparedStatements will be MUCH slower than Statements if you have low iterations. To gain a performance benefit from using a PrepareStatement over a statement, you need to be using it in a loop where iterations are at least 50 or higher.






          share|improve this answer



















          • 6





            No, it won't, ever. A normal Statement (not PrepareStatement) object has to do ALL the same things a PreparedStatement does and is in fact a wrapper around PreparedStatement that actually does the prepared part as well. The difference between the two is that a Statement object silently prepares the statement and validates it every time you execute it, where as a prepared statement only does that once and then can be executed multiple times to process each item in the batch.

            – David
            Oct 12 '15 at 19:29













          • is this answer valid at all??

            – prayagupd
            Mar 13 '17 at 2:42



















          -9














          Batch insert using statement



          int a= 100;
          try {
          for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
          String insert = "insert into usermaster"
          + "("
          + "userid"
          + ")"
          + "values("
          + "'" + a + "'"
          + ");";
          statement.addBatch(insert);
          System.out.println(insert);
          a++;
          }
          dbConnection.commit();
          } catch (SQLException e) {
          System.out.println(" Insert Failed");
          System.out.println(e.getMessage());
          } finally {

          if (statement != null) {
          statement.close();
          }
          if (dbConnection != null) {
          dbConnection.close();
          }
          }





          share|improve this answer



















          • 20





            Oh, Yes. Little Bobby Tables...

            – Daniel Dinnyes
            Sep 2 '13 at 14:42











          • Dynamic statements are almost always a bad idea. Both for security (although it is not the case in this very simple example) and performance.

            – frroland
            May 18 '15 at 12:51











          Your Answer






          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
          StackExchange.snippets.init();
          });
          });
          }, "code-snippets");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "1"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f3784197%2fefficient-way-to-do-batch-inserts-with-jdbc%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          9 Answers
          9






          active

          oldest

          votes








          9 Answers
          9






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          108














          This is a mix of the two previous answers:



            PreparedStatement ps = c.prepareStatement("INSERT INTO employees VALUES (?, ?)");

          ps.setString(1, "John");
          ps.setString(2,"Doe");
          ps.addBatch();

          ps.clearParameters();
          ps.setString(1, "Dave");
          ps.setString(2,"Smith");
          ps.addBatch();

          ps.clearParameters();
          int results = ps.executeBatch();





          share|improve this answer





















          • 3





            This is perfect solutions as statement is prepared (parsed) only once.

            – Ashish Patil
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:06






          • 30





            The ps.clearParameters(); is unnecessary in this particular case.

            – BalusC
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:21











          • Be sure to measure it. Depending on the JDBC driver's implementation this might be the expected one roundtrip per batch but can also end up being one roundtrip per statement.

            – stracktracer
            Jun 20 '14 at 0:00











          • prepareStatement/setXXX - that's the way it should be!

            – msciwoj
            Jul 8 '16 at 12:49
















          108














          This is a mix of the two previous answers:



            PreparedStatement ps = c.prepareStatement("INSERT INTO employees VALUES (?, ?)");

          ps.setString(1, "John");
          ps.setString(2,"Doe");
          ps.addBatch();

          ps.clearParameters();
          ps.setString(1, "Dave");
          ps.setString(2,"Smith");
          ps.addBatch();

          ps.clearParameters();
          int results = ps.executeBatch();





          share|improve this answer





















          • 3





            This is perfect solutions as statement is prepared (parsed) only once.

            – Ashish Patil
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:06






          • 30





            The ps.clearParameters(); is unnecessary in this particular case.

            – BalusC
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:21











          • Be sure to measure it. Depending on the JDBC driver's implementation this might be the expected one roundtrip per batch but can also end up being one roundtrip per statement.

            – stracktracer
            Jun 20 '14 at 0:00











          • prepareStatement/setXXX - that's the way it should be!

            – msciwoj
            Jul 8 '16 at 12:49














          108












          108








          108







          This is a mix of the two previous answers:



            PreparedStatement ps = c.prepareStatement("INSERT INTO employees VALUES (?, ?)");

          ps.setString(1, "John");
          ps.setString(2,"Doe");
          ps.addBatch();

          ps.clearParameters();
          ps.setString(1, "Dave");
          ps.setString(2,"Smith");
          ps.addBatch();

          ps.clearParameters();
          int results = ps.executeBatch();





          share|improve this answer















          This is a mix of the two previous answers:



            PreparedStatement ps = c.prepareStatement("INSERT INTO employees VALUES (?, ?)");

          ps.setString(1, "John");
          ps.setString(2,"Doe");
          ps.addBatch();

          ps.clearParameters();
          ps.setString(1, "Dave");
          ps.setString(2,"Smith");
          ps.addBatch();

          ps.clearParameters();
          int results = ps.executeBatch();






          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Oct 1 '13 at 8:12









          Matthias

          9,75023676




          9,75023676










          answered Sep 24 '10 at 10:26









          TuscTusc

          1,227187




          1,227187








          • 3





            This is perfect solutions as statement is prepared (parsed) only once.

            – Ashish Patil
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:06






          • 30





            The ps.clearParameters(); is unnecessary in this particular case.

            – BalusC
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:21











          • Be sure to measure it. Depending on the JDBC driver's implementation this might be the expected one roundtrip per batch but can also end up being one roundtrip per statement.

            – stracktracer
            Jun 20 '14 at 0:00











          • prepareStatement/setXXX - that's the way it should be!

            – msciwoj
            Jul 8 '16 at 12:49














          • 3





            This is perfect solutions as statement is prepared (parsed) only once.

            – Ashish Patil
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:06






          • 30





            The ps.clearParameters(); is unnecessary in this particular case.

            – BalusC
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:21











          • Be sure to measure it. Depending on the JDBC driver's implementation this might be the expected one roundtrip per batch but can also end up being one roundtrip per statement.

            – stracktracer
            Jun 20 '14 at 0:00











          • prepareStatement/setXXX - that's the way it should be!

            – msciwoj
            Jul 8 '16 at 12:49








          3




          3





          This is perfect solutions as statement is prepared (parsed) only once.

          – Ashish Patil
          Sep 24 '10 at 12:06





          This is perfect solutions as statement is prepared (parsed) only once.

          – Ashish Patil
          Sep 24 '10 at 12:06




          30




          30





          The ps.clearParameters(); is unnecessary in this particular case.

          – BalusC
          Sep 24 '10 at 12:21





          The ps.clearParameters(); is unnecessary in this particular case.

          – BalusC
          Sep 24 '10 at 12:21













          Be sure to measure it. Depending on the JDBC driver's implementation this might be the expected one roundtrip per batch but can also end up being one roundtrip per statement.

          – stracktracer
          Jun 20 '14 at 0:00





          Be sure to measure it. Depending on the JDBC driver's implementation this might be the expected one roundtrip per batch but can also end up being one roundtrip per statement.

          – stracktracer
          Jun 20 '14 at 0:00













          prepareStatement/setXXX - that's the way it should be!

          – msciwoj
          Jul 8 '16 at 12:49





          prepareStatement/setXXX - that's the way it should be!

          – msciwoj
          Jul 8 '16 at 12:49













          16














          Though the question asks inserting efficiently to Oracle using JDBC, I'm currently playing with DB2 (On IBM mainframe), conceptually inserting would be similar so thought it might be helpful to see my metrics between




          • inserting one record at a time


          • inserting a batch of records (very efficient)



          Here go the metrics



          1) Inserting one record at a time



          public void writeWithCompileQuery(int records) {
          PreparedStatement statement;

          try {
          Connection connection = getDatabaseConnection();
          connection.setAutoCommit(true);

          String compiledQuery = "INSERT INTO TESTDB.EMPLOYEE(EMPNO, EMPNM, DEPT, RANK, USERNAME)" +
          " VALUES" + "(?, ?, ?, ?, ?)";
          statement = connection.prepareStatement(compiledQuery);

          long start = System.currentTimeMillis();

          for(int index = 1; index < records; index++) {
          statement.setInt(1, index);
          statement.setString(2, "emp number-"+index);
          statement.setInt(3, index);
          statement.setInt(4, index);
          statement.setString(5, "username");

          long startInternal = System.currentTimeMillis();
          statement.executeUpdate();
          System.out.println("each transaction time taken = " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startInternal) + " ms");
          }

          long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
          System.out.println("total time taken = " + (end - start) + " ms");
          System.out.println("avg total time taken = " + (end - start)/ records + " ms");

          statement.close();
          connection.close();

          } catch (SQLException ex) {
          System.err.println("SQLException information");
          while (ex != null) {
          System.err.println("Error msg: " + ex.getMessage());
          ex = ex.getNextException();
          }
          }
          }


          The metrics for 100 transactions :



          each transaction time taken = 123 ms
          each transaction time taken = 53 ms
          each transaction time taken = 48 ms
          each transaction time taken = 48 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          ...
          ..
          .
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          total time taken = 4935 ms
          avg total time taken = 49 ms


          The first transaction is taking around 120-150ms which is for the query parse and then execution, the subsequent transactions are only taking around 50ms. (Which is still high, but my database is on a different server(I need to troubleshoot the network))




          2) With insertion in a batch (efficient one) - achieved by preparedStatement.executeBatch()



          public int writeInABatchWithCompiledQuery(int records) {
          PreparedStatement preparedStatement;

          try {
          Connection connection = getDatabaseConnection();
          connection.setAutoCommit(true);

          String compiledQuery = "INSERT INTO TESTDB.EMPLOYEE(EMPNO, EMPNM, DEPT, RANK, USERNAME)" +
          " VALUES" + "(?, ?, ?, ?, ?)";
          preparedStatement = connection.prepareStatement(compiledQuery);

          for(int index = 1; index <= records; index++) {
          preparedStatement.setInt(1, index);
          preparedStatement.setString(2, "empo number-"+index);
          preparedStatement.setInt(3, index+100);
          preparedStatement.setInt(4, index+200);
          preparedStatement.setString(5, "usernames");
          preparedStatement.addBatch();
          }

          long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
          int inserted = preparedStatement.executeBatch();
          long end = System.currentTimeMillis();

          System.out.println("total time taken to insert the batch = " + (end - start) + " ms");
          System.out.println("total time taken = " + (end - start)/records + " s");

          preparedStatement.close();
          connection.close();

          return inserted;

          } catch (SQLException ex) {
          System.err.println("SQLException information");
          while (ex != null) {
          System.err.println("Error msg: " + ex.getMessage());
          ex = ex.getNextException();
          }
          throw new RuntimeException("Error");
          }
          }


          The metrics for a batch of 100 transactions is



          total time taken to insert the batch = 127 ms


          and for 1000 transactions



          total time taken to insert the batch = 341 ms


          So, making 100 transactions in ~5000ms (with one trxn at a time) is decreased to ~150ms (with a batch of 100 records).



          NOTE - Ignore my network which is super slow, but the metrics values would be relative.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 1





            Hi. Does the length of the record play a role in the time to insert ?? I have 3 Varchar columns with URIs as their values and inserting 8555 as a batch still takind ~3.5 min to insert !!

            – Prathamesh dhanawade
            Oct 30 '17 at 16:47











          • As per my understanding record size might matter during data transfer to database server from your application server but insertion time does not affect much. I tried in local oracle database with 3 columns of size 125 bytes and takes around (145 to 300) ms for batch of 10,000 records. Code here. While multiple transactions for 10,000 records takes 20seconds.

            – prayagupd
            Dec 16 '18 at 20:41
















          16














          Though the question asks inserting efficiently to Oracle using JDBC, I'm currently playing with DB2 (On IBM mainframe), conceptually inserting would be similar so thought it might be helpful to see my metrics between




          • inserting one record at a time


          • inserting a batch of records (very efficient)



          Here go the metrics



          1) Inserting one record at a time



          public void writeWithCompileQuery(int records) {
          PreparedStatement statement;

          try {
          Connection connection = getDatabaseConnection();
          connection.setAutoCommit(true);

          String compiledQuery = "INSERT INTO TESTDB.EMPLOYEE(EMPNO, EMPNM, DEPT, RANK, USERNAME)" +
          " VALUES" + "(?, ?, ?, ?, ?)";
          statement = connection.prepareStatement(compiledQuery);

          long start = System.currentTimeMillis();

          for(int index = 1; index < records; index++) {
          statement.setInt(1, index);
          statement.setString(2, "emp number-"+index);
          statement.setInt(3, index);
          statement.setInt(4, index);
          statement.setString(5, "username");

          long startInternal = System.currentTimeMillis();
          statement.executeUpdate();
          System.out.println("each transaction time taken = " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startInternal) + " ms");
          }

          long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
          System.out.println("total time taken = " + (end - start) + " ms");
          System.out.println("avg total time taken = " + (end - start)/ records + " ms");

          statement.close();
          connection.close();

          } catch (SQLException ex) {
          System.err.println("SQLException information");
          while (ex != null) {
          System.err.println("Error msg: " + ex.getMessage());
          ex = ex.getNextException();
          }
          }
          }


          The metrics for 100 transactions :



          each transaction time taken = 123 ms
          each transaction time taken = 53 ms
          each transaction time taken = 48 ms
          each transaction time taken = 48 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          ...
          ..
          .
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          total time taken = 4935 ms
          avg total time taken = 49 ms


          The first transaction is taking around 120-150ms which is for the query parse and then execution, the subsequent transactions are only taking around 50ms. (Which is still high, but my database is on a different server(I need to troubleshoot the network))




          2) With insertion in a batch (efficient one) - achieved by preparedStatement.executeBatch()



          public int writeInABatchWithCompiledQuery(int records) {
          PreparedStatement preparedStatement;

          try {
          Connection connection = getDatabaseConnection();
          connection.setAutoCommit(true);

          String compiledQuery = "INSERT INTO TESTDB.EMPLOYEE(EMPNO, EMPNM, DEPT, RANK, USERNAME)" +
          " VALUES" + "(?, ?, ?, ?, ?)";
          preparedStatement = connection.prepareStatement(compiledQuery);

          for(int index = 1; index <= records; index++) {
          preparedStatement.setInt(1, index);
          preparedStatement.setString(2, "empo number-"+index);
          preparedStatement.setInt(3, index+100);
          preparedStatement.setInt(4, index+200);
          preparedStatement.setString(5, "usernames");
          preparedStatement.addBatch();
          }

          long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
          int inserted = preparedStatement.executeBatch();
          long end = System.currentTimeMillis();

          System.out.println("total time taken to insert the batch = " + (end - start) + " ms");
          System.out.println("total time taken = " + (end - start)/records + " s");

          preparedStatement.close();
          connection.close();

          return inserted;

          } catch (SQLException ex) {
          System.err.println("SQLException information");
          while (ex != null) {
          System.err.println("Error msg: " + ex.getMessage());
          ex = ex.getNextException();
          }
          throw new RuntimeException("Error");
          }
          }


          The metrics for a batch of 100 transactions is



          total time taken to insert the batch = 127 ms


          and for 1000 transactions



          total time taken to insert the batch = 341 ms


          So, making 100 transactions in ~5000ms (with one trxn at a time) is decreased to ~150ms (with a batch of 100 records).



          NOTE - Ignore my network which is super slow, but the metrics values would be relative.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 1





            Hi. Does the length of the record play a role in the time to insert ?? I have 3 Varchar columns with URIs as their values and inserting 8555 as a batch still takind ~3.5 min to insert !!

            – Prathamesh dhanawade
            Oct 30 '17 at 16:47











          • As per my understanding record size might matter during data transfer to database server from your application server but insertion time does not affect much. I tried in local oracle database with 3 columns of size 125 bytes and takes around (145 to 300) ms for batch of 10,000 records. Code here. While multiple transactions for 10,000 records takes 20seconds.

            – prayagupd
            Dec 16 '18 at 20:41














          16












          16








          16







          Though the question asks inserting efficiently to Oracle using JDBC, I'm currently playing with DB2 (On IBM mainframe), conceptually inserting would be similar so thought it might be helpful to see my metrics between




          • inserting one record at a time


          • inserting a batch of records (very efficient)



          Here go the metrics



          1) Inserting one record at a time



          public void writeWithCompileQuery(int records) {
          PreparedStatement statement;

          try {
          Connection connection = getDatabaseConnection();
          connection.setAutoCommit(true);

          String compiledQuery = "INSERT INTO TESTDB.EMPLOYEE(EMPNO, EMPNM, DEPT, RANK, USERNAME)" +
          " VALUES" + "(?, ?, ?, ?, ?)";
          statement = connection.prepareStatement(compiledQuery);

          long start = System.currentTimeMillis();

          for(int index = 1; index < records; index++) {
          statement.setInt(1, index);
          statement.setString(2, "emp number-"+index);
          statement.setInt(3, index);
          statement.setInt(4, index);
          statement.setString(5, "username");

          long startInternal = System.currentTimeMillis();
          statement.executeUpdate();
          System.out.println("each transaction time taken = " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startInternal) + " ms");
          }

          long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
          System.out.println("total time taken = " + (end - start) + " ms");
          System.out.println("avg total time taken = " + (end - start)/ records + " ms");

          statement.close();
          connection.close();

          } catch (SQLException ex) {
          System.err.println("SQLException information");
          while (ex != null) {
          System.err.println("Error msg: " + ex.getMessage());
          ex = ex.getNextException();
          }
          }
          }


          The metrics for 100 transactions :



          each transaction time taken = 123 ms
          each transaction time taken = 53 ms
          each transaction time taken = 48 ms
          each transaction time taken = 48 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          ...
          ..
          .
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          total time taken = 4935 ms
          avg total time taken = 49 ms


          The first transaction is taking around 120-150ms which is for the query parse and then execution, the subsequent transactions are only taking around 50ms. (Which is still high, but my database is on a different server(I need to troubleshoot the network))




          2) With insertion in a batch (efficient one) - achieved by preparedStatement.executeBatch()



          public int writeInABatchWithCompiledQuery(int records) {
          PreparedStatement preparedStatement;

          try {
          Connection connection = getDatabaseConnection();
          connection.setAutoCommit(true);

          String compiledQuery = "INSERT INTO TESTDB.EMPLOYEE(EMPNO, EMPNM, DEPT, RANK, USERNAME)" +
          " VALUES" + "(?, ?, ?, ?, ?)";
          preparedStatement = connection.prepareStatement(compiledQuery);

          for(int index = 1; index <= records; index++) {
          preparedStatement.setInt(1, index);
          preparedStatement.setString(2, "empo number-"+index);
          preparedStatement.setInt(3, index+100);
          preparedStatement.setInt(4, index+200);
          preparedStatement.setString(5, "usernames");
          preparedStatement.addBatch();
          }

          long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
          int inserted = preparedStatement.executeBatch();
          long end = System.currentTimeMillis();

          System.out.println("total time taken to insert the batch = " + (end - start) + " ms");
          System.out.println("total time taken = " + (end - start)/records + " s");

          preparedStatement.close();
          connection.close();

          return inserted;

          } catch (SQLException ex) {
          System.err.println("SQLException information");
          while (ex != null) {
          System.err.println("Error msg: " + ex.getMessage());
          ex = ex.getNextException();
          }
          throw new RuntimeException("Error");
          }
          }


          The metrics for a batch of 100 transactions is



          total time taken to insert the batch = 127 ms


          and for 1000 transactions



          total time taken to insert the batch = 341 ms


          So, making 100 transactions in ~5000ms (with one trxn at a time) is decreased to ~150ms (with a batch of 100 records).



          NOTE - Ignore my network which is super slow, but the metrics values would be relative.






          share|improve this answer















          Though the question asks inserting efficiently to Oracle using JDBC, I'm currently playing with DB2 (On IBM mainframe), conceptually inserting would be similar so thought it might be helpful to see my metrics between




          • inserting one record at a time


          • inserting a batch of records (very efficient)



          Here go the metrics



          1) Inserting one record at a time



          public void writeWithCompileQuery(int records) {
          PreparedStatement statement;

          try {
          Connection connection = getDatabaseConnection();
          connection.setAutoCommit(true);

          String compiledQuery = "INSERT INTO TESTDB.EMPLOYEE(EMPNO, EMPNM, DEPT, RANK, USERNAME)" +
          " VALUES" + "(?, ?, ?, ?, ?)";
          statement = connection.prepareStatement(compiledQuery);

          long start = System.currentTimeMillis();

          for(int index = 1; index < records; index++) {
          statement.setInt(1, index);
          statement.setString(2, "emp number-"+index);
          statement.setInt(3, index);
          statement.setInt(4, index);
          statement.setString(5, "username");

          long startInternal = System.currentTimeMillis();
          statement.executeUpdate();
          System.out.println("each transaction time taken = " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startInternal) + " ms");
          }

          long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
          System.out.println("total time taken = " + (end - start) + " ms");
          System.out.println("avg total time taken = " + (end - start)/ records + " ms");

          statement.close();
          connection.close();

          } catch (SQLException ex) {
          System.err.println("SQLException information");
          while (ex != null) {
          System.err.println("Error msg: " + ex.getMessage());
          ex = ex.getNextException();
          }
          }
          }


          The metrics for 100 transactions :



          each transaction time taken = 123 ms
          each transaction time taken = 53 ms
          each transaction time taken = 48 ms
          each transaction time taken = 48 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          ...
          ..
          .
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          each transaction time taken = 49 ms
          total time taken = 4935 ms
          avg total time taken = 49 ms


          The first transaction is taking around 120-150ms which is for the query parse and then execution, the subsequent transactions are only taking around 50ms. (Which is still high, but my database is on a different server(I need to troubleshoot the network))




          2) With insertion in a batch (efficient one) - achieved by preparedStatement.executeBatch()



          public int writeInABatchWithCompiledQuery(int records) {
          PreparedStatement preparedStatement;

          try {
          Connection connection = getDatabaseConnection();
          connection.setAutoCommit(true);

          String compiledQuery = "INSERT INTO TESTDB.EMPLOYEE(EMPNO, EMPNM, DEPT, RANK, USERNAME)" +
          " VALUES" + "(?, ?, ?, ?, ?)";
          preparedStatement = connection.prepareStatement(compiledQuery);

          for(int index = 1; index <= records; index++) {
          preparedStatement.setInt(1, index);
          preparedStatement.setString(2, "empo number-"+index);
          preparedStatement.setInt(3, index+100);
          preparedStatement.setInt(4, index+200);
          preparedStatement.setString(5, "usernames");
          preparedStatement.addBatch();
          }

          long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
          int inserted = preparedStatement.executeBatch();
          long end = System.currentTimeMillis();

          System.out.println("total time taken to insert the batch = " + (end - start) + " ms");
          System.out.println("total time taken = " + (end - start)/records + " s");

          preparedStatement.close();
          connection.close();

          return inserted;

          } catch (SQLException ex) {
          System.err.println("SQLException information");
          while (ex != null) {
          System.err.println("Error msg: " + ex.getMessage());
          ex = ex.getNextException();
          }
          throw new RuntimeException("Error");
          }
          }


          The metrics for a batch of 100 transactions is



          total time taken to insert the batch = 127 ms


          and for 1000 transactions



          total time taken to insert the batch = 341 ms


          So, making 100 transactions in ~5000ms (with one trxn at a time) is decreased to ~150ms (with a batch of 100 records).



          NOTE - Ignore my network which is super slow, but the metrics values would be relative.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Dec 16 '18 at 19:40

























          answered Mar 13 '17 at 3:20









          prayagupdprayagupd

          19.9k890139




          19.9k890139








          • 1





            Hi. Does the length of the record play a role in the time to insert ?? I have 3 Varchar columns with URIs as their values and inserting 8555 as a batch still takind ~3.5 min to insert !!

            – Prathamesh dhanawade
            Oct 30 '17 at 16:47











          • As per my understanding record size might matter during data transfer to database server from your application server but insertion time does not affect much. I tried in local oracle database with 3 columns of size 125 bytes and takes around (145 to 300) ms for batch of 10,000 records. Code here. While multiple transactions for 10,000 records takes 20seconds.

            – prayagupd
            Dec 16 '18 at 20:41














          • 1





            Hi. Does the length of the record play a role in the time to insert ?? I have 3 Varchar columns with URIs as their values and inserting 8555 as a batch still takind ~3.5 min to insert !!

            – Prathamesh dhanawade
            Oct 30 '17 at 16:47











          • As per my understanding record size might matter during data transfer to database server from your application server but insertion time does not affect much. I tried in local oracle database with 3 columns of size 125 bytes and takes around (145 to 300) ms for batch of 10,000 records. Code here. While multiple transactions for 10,000 records takes 20seconds.

            – prayagupd
            Dec 16 '18 at 20:41








          1




          1





          Hi. Does the length of the record play a role in the time to insert ?? I have 3 Varchar columns with URIs as their values and inserting 8555 as a batch still takind ~3.5 min to insert !!

          – Prathamesh dhanawade
          Oct 30 '17 at 16:47





          Hi. Does the length of the record play a role in the time to insert ?? I have 3 Varchar columns with URIs as their values and inserting 8555 as a batch still takind ~3.5 min to insert !!

          – Prathamesh dhanawade
          Oct 30 '17 at 16:47













          As per my understanding record size might matter during data transfer to database server from your application server but insertion time does not affect much. I tried in local oracle database with 3 columns of size 125 bytes and takes around (145 to 300) ms for batch of 10,000 records. Code here. While multiple transactions for 10,000 records takes 20seconds.

          – prayagupd
          Dec 16 '18 at 20:41





          As per my understanding record size might matter during data transfer to database server from your application server but insertion time does not affect much. I tried in local oracle database with 3 columns of size 125 bytes and takes around (145 to 300) ms for batch of 10,000 records. Code here. While multiple transactions for 10,000 records takes 20seconds.

          – prayagupd
          Dec 16 '18 at 20:41











          6














          The Statement gives you the following option:



          Statement stmt = con.createStatement();

          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO employees VALUES (1000, 'Joe Jones')");
          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO departments VALUES (260, 'Shoe')");
          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO emp_dept VALUES (1000, 260)");

          // submit a batch of update commands for execution
          int updateCounts = stmt.executeBatch();





          share|improve this answer



















          • 6





            While the end result is same, in this method, multiple statements are parsed, which is much slower for bulk, in fact not much efficient than executing each statement individually. Also please use PreparedStatement whenever possible for repeated queries as they perform much better..

            – Ashish Patil
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:09











          • @AshishPatil: do you have any benchmarks for testing with and without PreparedStatement?

            – gaurav
            Aug 13 '18 at 11:10











          • Whoa! After 8 years. Nevertheless, @prayagupd has given detailed stats in his answer which is much more recent. stackoverflow.com/a/42756134/372055

            – Ashish Patil
            Aug 13 '18 at 14:34
















          6














          The Statement gives you the following option:



          Statement stmt = con.createStatement();

          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO employees VALUES (1000, 'Joe Jones')");
          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO departments VALUES (260, 'Shoe')");
          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO emp_dept VALUES (1000, 260)");

          // submit a batch of update commands for execution
          int updateCounts = stmt.executeBatch();





          share|improve this answer



















          • 6





            While the end result is same, in this method, multiple statements are parsed, which is much slower for bulk, in fact not much efficient than executing each statement individually. Also please use PreparedStatement whenever possible for repeated queries as they perform much better..

            – Ashish Patil
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:09











          • @AshishPatil: do you have any benchmarks for testing with and without PreparedStatement?

            – gaurav
            Aug 13 '18 at 11:10











          • Whoa! After 8 years. Nevertheless, @prayagupd has given detailed stats in his answer which is much more recent. stackoverflow.com/a/42756134/372055

            – Ashish Patil
            Aug 13 '18 at 14:34














          6












          6








          6







          The Statement gives you the following option:



          Statement stmt = con.createStatement();

          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO employees VALUES (1000, 'Joe Jones')");
          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO departments VALUES (260, 'Shoe')");
          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO emp_dept VALUES (1000, 260)");

          // submit a batch of update commands for execution
          int updateCounts = stmt.executeBatch();





          share|improve this answer













          The Statement gives you the following option:



          Statement stmt = con.createStatement();

          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO employees VALUES (1000, 'Joe Jones')");
          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO departments VALUES (260, 'Shoe')");
          stmt.addBatch("INSERT INTO emp_dept VALUES (1000, 260)");

          // submit a batch of update commands for execution
          int updateCounts = stmt.executeBatch();






          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Sep 24 '10 at 10:10









          BozhoBozho

          485k1089521064




          485k1089521064








          • 6





            While the end result is same, in this method, multiple statements are parsed, which is much slower for bulk, in fact not much efficient than executing each statement individually. Also please use PreparedStatement whenever possible for repeated queries as they perform much better..

            – Ashish Patil
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:09











          • @AshishPatil: do you have any benchmarks for testing with and without PreparedStatement?

            – gaurav
            Aug 13 '18 at 11:10











          • Whoa! After 8 years. Nevertheless, @prayagupd has given detailed stats in his answer which is much more recent. stackoverflow.com/a/42756134/372055

            – Ashish Patil
            Aug 13 '18 at 14:34














          • 6





            While the end result is same, in this method, multiple statements are parsed, which is much slower for bulk, in fact not much efficient than executing each statement individually. Also please use PreparedStatement whenever possible for repeated queries as they perform much better..

            – Ashish Patil
            Sep 24 '10 at 12:09











          • @AshishPatil: do you have any benchmarks for testing with and without PreparedStatement?

            – gaurav
            Aug 13 '18 at 11:10











          • Whoa! After 8 years. Nevertheless, @prayagupd has given detailed stats in his answer which is much more recent. stackoverflow.com/a/42756134/372055

            – Ashish Patil
            Aug 13 '18 at 14:34








          6




          6





          While the end result is same, in this method, multiple statements are parsed, which is much slower for bulk, in fact not much efficient than executing each statement individually. Also please use PreparedStatement whenever possible for repeated queries as they perform much better..

          – Ashish Patil
          Sep 24 '10 at 12:09





          While the end result is same, in this method, multiple statements are parsed, which is much slower for bulk, in fact not much efficient than executing each statement individually. Also please use PreparedStatement whenever possible for repeated queries as they perform much better..

          – Ashish Patil
          Sep 24 '10 at 12:09













          @AshishPatil: do you have any benchmarks for testing with and without PreparedStatement?

          – gaurav
          Aug 13 '18 at 11:10





          @AshishPatil: do you have any benchmarks for testing with and without PreparedStatement?

          – gaurav
          Aug 13 '18 at 11:10













          Whoa! After 8 years. Nevertheless, @prayagupd has given detailed stats in his answer which is much more recent. stackoverflow.com/a/42756134/372055

          – Ashish Patil
          Aug 13 '18 at 14:34





          Whoa! After 8 years. Nevertheless, @prayagupd has given detailed stats in his answer which is much more recent. stackoverflow.com/a/42756134/372055

          – Ashish Patil
          Aug 13 '18 at 14:34











          4














          You'll have to benchmark, obviously, but over JDBC issuing multiple inserts will be much faster if you use a PreparedStatement rather than a Statement.






          share|improve this answer




























            4














            You'll have to benchmark, obviously, but over JDBC issuing multiple inserts will be much faster if you use a PreparedStatement rather than a Statement.






            share|improve this answer


























              4












              4








              4







              You'll have to benchmark, obviously, but over JDBC issuing multiple inserts will be much faster if you use a PreparedStatement rather than a Statement.






              share|improve this answer













              You'll have to benchmark, obviously, but over JDBC issuing multiple inserts will be much faster if you use a PreparedStatement rather than a Statement.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered Sep 24 '10 at 4:33









              Burleigh BearBurleigh Bear

              2,7261627




              2,7261627























                  0














                  How about using the INSERT ALL statement ?



                  INSERT ALL

                  INTO table_name VALUES ()

                  INTO table_name VALUES ()

                  ...

                  SELECT Statement;


                  I remember that the last select statement is mandatory in order to make this request succeed. Don't remember why though.
                  You might consider using PreparedStatement instead as well. lots of advantages !



                  Farid






                  share|improve this answer




























                    0














                    How about using the INSERT ALL statement ?



                    INSERT ALL

                    INTO table_name VALUES ()

                    INTO table_name VALUES ()

                    ...

                    SELECT Statement;


                    I remember that the last select statement is mandatory in order to make this request succeed. Don't remember why though.
                    You might consider using PreparedStatement instead as well. lots of advantages !



                    Farid






                    share|improve this answer


























                      0












                      0








                      0







                      How about using the INSERT ALL statement ?



                      INSERT ALL

                      INTO table_name VALUES ()

                      INTO table_name VALUES ()

                      ...

                      SELECT Statement;


                      I remember that the last select statement is mandatory in order to make this request succeed. Don't remember why though.
                      You might consider using PreparedStatement instead as well. lots of advantages !



                      Farid






                      share|improve this answer













                      How about using the INSERT ALL statement ?



                      INSERT ALL

                      INTO table_name VALUES ()

                      INTO table_name VALUES ()

                      ...

                      SELECT Statement;


                      I remember that the last select statement is mandatory in order to make this request succeed. Don't remember why though.
                      You might consider using PreparedStatement instead as well. lots of advantages !



                      Farid







                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered Sep 24 '10 at 10:27









                      FaridFarid

                      71221224




                      71221224























                          0














                          You can use addBatch and executeBatch for batch insert in java See the Example : Batch Insert In Java






                          share|improve this answer




























                            0














                            You can use addBatch and executeBatch for batch insert in java See the Example : Batch Insert In Java






                            share|improve this answer


























                              0












                              0








                              0







                              You can use addBatch and executeBatch for batch insert in java See the Example : Batch Insert In Java






                              share|improve this answer













                              You can use addBatch and executeBatch for batch insert in java See the Example : Batch Insert In Java







                              share|improve this answer












                              share|improve this answer



                              share|improve this answer










                              answered Sep 18 '13 at 9:29









                              user1454294user1454294

                              11




                              11























                                  0














                                  In my code I have no direct access to the 'preparedStatement' so I cannot use batch, I just pass it the query and a list of parameters. The trick however is to create a variable length insert statement, and a LinkedList of parameters. The effect is the same as the top example, with variable parameter input length.See below (error checking omitted).
                                  Assuming 'myTable' has 3 updatable fields: f1, f2 and f3



                                  String args={"A","B","C", "X","Y","Z" }; // etc, input list of triplets
                                  final String QUERY="INSERT INTO [myTable] (f1,f2,f3) values ";
                                  LinkedList params=new LinkedList();
                                  String comma="";
                                  StringBuilder q=QUERY;
                                  for(int nl=0; nl< args.length; nl+=3 ) { // args is a list of triplets values
                                  params.add(args[nl]);
                                  params.add(args[nl+1]);
                                  params.add(args[nl+2]);
                                  q.append(comma+"(?,?,?)");
                                  comma=",";
                                  }
                                  int nr=insertIntoDB(q, params);


                                  in my DBInterface class I have:



                                  int insertIntoDB(String query, LinkedList <String>params) {
                                  preparedUPDStmt = connectionSQL.prepareStatement(query);
                                  int n=1;
                                  for(String x:params) {
                                  preparedUPDStmt.setString(n++, x);
                                  }
                                  int updates=preparedUPDStmt.executeUpdate();
                                  return updates;
                                  }





                                  share|improve this answer




























                                    0














                                    In my code I have no direct access to the 'preparedStatement' so I cannot use batch, I just pass it the query and a list of parameters. The trick however is to create a variable length insert statement, and a LinkedList of parameters. The effect is the same as the top example, with variable parameter input length.See below (error checking omitted).
                                    Assuming 'myTable' has 3 updatable fields: f1, f2 and f3



                                    String args={"A","B","C", "X","Y","Z" }; // etc, input list of triplets
                                    final String QUERY="INSERT INTO [myTable] (f1,f2,f3) values ";
                                    LinkedList params=new LinkedList();
                                    String comma="";
                                    StringBuilder q=QUERY;
                                    for(int nl=0; nl< args.length; nl+=3 ) { // args is a list of triplets values
                                    params.add(args[nl]);
                                    params.add(args[nl+1]);
                                    params.add(args[nl+2]);
                                    q.append(comma+"(?,?,?)");
                                    comma=",";
                                    }
                                    int nr=insertIntoDB(q, params);


                                    in my DBInterface class I have:



                                    int insertIntoDB(String query, LinkedList <String>params) {
                                    preparedUPDStmt = connectionSQL.prepareStatement(query);
                                    int n=1;
                                    for(String x:params) {
                                    preparedUPDStmt.setString(n++, x);
                                    }
                                    int updates=preparedUPDStmt.executeUpdate();
                                    return updates;
                                    }





                                    share|improve this answer


























                                      0












                                      0








                                      0







                                      In my code I have no direct access to the 'preparedStatement' so I cannot use batch, I just pass it the query and a list of parameters. The trick however is to create a variable length insert statement, and a LinkedList of parameters. The effect is the same as the top example, with variable parameter input length.See below (error checking omitted).
                                      Assuming 'myTable' has 3 updatable fields: f1, f2 and f3



                                      String args={"A","B","C", "X","Y","Z" }; // etc, input list of triplets
                                      final String QUERY="INSERT INTO [myTable] (f1,f2,f3) values ";
                                      LinkedList params=new LinkedList();
                                      String comma="";
                                      StringBuilder q=QUERY;
                                      for(int nl=0; nl< args.length; nl+=3 ) { // args is a list of triplets values
                                      params.add(args[nl]);
                                      params.add(args[nl+1]);
                                      params.add(args[nl+2]);
                                      q.append(comma+"(?,?,?)");
                                      comma=",";
                                      }
                                      int nr=insertIntoDB(q, params);


                                      in my DBInterface class I have:



                                      int insertIntoDB(String query, LinkedList <String>params) {
                                      preparedUPDStmt = connectionSQL.prepareStatement(query);
                                      int n=1;
                                      for(String x:params) {
                                      preparedUPDStmt.setString(n++, x);
                                      }
                                      int updates=preparedUPDStmt.executeUpdate();
                                      return updates;
                                      }





                                      share|improve this answer













                                      In my code I have no direct access to the 'preparedStatement' so I cannot use batch, I just pass it the query and a list of parameters. The trick however is to create a variable length insert statement, and a LinkedList of parameters. The effect is the same as the top example, with variable parameter input length.See below (error checking omitted).
                                      Assuming 'myTable' has 3 updatable fields: f1, f2 and f3



                                      String args={"A","B","C", "X","Y","Z" }; // etc, input list of triplets
                                      final String QUERY="INSERT INTO [myTable] (f1,f2,f3) values ";
                                      LinkedList params=new LinkedList();
                                      String comma="";
                                      StringBuilder q=QUERY;
                                      for(int nl=0; nl< args.length; nl+=3 ) { // args is a list of triplets values
                                      params.add(args[nl]);
                                      params.add(args[nl+1]);
                                      params.add(args[nl+2]);
                                      q.append(comma+"(?,?,?)");
                                      comma=",";
                                      }
                                      int nr=insertIntoDB(q, params);


                                      in my DBInterface class I have:



                                      int insertIntoDB(String query, LinkedList <String>params) {
                                      preparedUPDStmt = connectionSQL.prepareStatement(query);
                                      int n=1;
                                      for(String x:params) {
                                      preparedUPDStmt.setString(n++, x);
                                      }
                                      int updates=preparedUPDStmt.executeUpdate();
                                      return updates;
                                      }






                                      share|improve this answer












                                      share|improve this answer



                                      share|improve this answer










                                      answered Nov 14 '18 at 12:34









                                      user3211098user3211098

                                      65




                                      65























                                          -3














                                          Using PreparedStatements will be MUCH slower than Statements if you have low iterations. To gain a performance benefit from using a PrepareStatement over a statement, you need to be using it in a loop where iterations are at least 50 or higher.






                                          share|improve this answer



















                                          • 6





                                            No, it won't, ever. A normal Statement (not PrepareStatement) object has to do ALL the same things a PreparedStatement does and is in fact a wrapper around PreparedStatement that actually does the prepared part as well. The difference between the two is that a Statement object silently prepares the statement and validates it every time you execute it, where as a prepared statement only does that once and then can be executed multiple times to process each item in the batch.

                                            – David
                                            Oct 12 '15 at 19:29













                                          • is this answer valid at all??

                                            – prayagupd
                                            Mar 13 '17 at 2:42
















                                          -3














                                          Using PreparedStatements will be MUCH slower than Statements if you have low iterations. To gain a performance benefit from using a PrepareStatement over a statement, you need to be using it in a loop where iterations are at least 50 or higher.






                                          share|improve this answer



















                                          • 6





                                            No, it won't, ever. A normal Statement (not PrepareStatement) object has to do ALL the same things a PreparedStatement does and is in fact a wrapper around PreparedStatement that actually does the prepared part as well. The difference between the two is that a Statement object silently prepares the statement and validates it every time you execute it, where as a prepared statement only does that once and then can be executed multiple times to process each item in the batch.

                                            – David
                                            Oct 12 '15 at 19:29













                                          • is this answer valid at all??

                                            – prayagupd
                                            Mar 13 '17 at 2:42














                                          -3












                                          -3








                                          -3







                                          Using PreparedStatements will be MUCH slower than Statements if you have low iterations. To gain a performance benefit from using a PrepareStatement over a statement, you need to be using it in a loop where iterations are at least 50 or higher.






                                          share|improve this answer













                                          Using PreparedStatements will be MUCH slower than Statements if you have low iterations. To gain a performance benefit from using a PrepareStatement over a statement, you need to be using it in a loop where iterations are at least 50 or higher.







                                          share|improve this answer












                                          share|improve this answer



                                          share|improve this answer










                                          answered Sep 30 '10 at 13:32









                                          MickeyMickey

                                          251




                                          251








                                          • 6





                                            No, it won't, ever. A normal Statement (not PrepareStatement) object has to do ALL the same things a PreparedStatement does and is in fact a wrapper around PreparedStatement that actually does the prepared part as well. The difference between the two is that a Statement object silently prepares the statement and validates it every time you execute it, where as a prepared statement only does that once and then can be executed multiple times to process each item in the batch.

                                            – David
                                            Oct 12 '15 at 19:29













                                          • is this answer valid at all??

                                            – prayagupd
                                            Mar 13 '17 at 2:42














                                          • 6





                                            No, it won't, ever. A normal Statement (not PrepareStatement) object has to do ALL the same things a PreparedStatement does and is in fact a wrapper around PreparedStatement that actually does the prepared part as well. The difference between the two is that a Statement object silently prepares the statement and validates it every time you execute it, where as a prepared statement only does that once and then can be executed multiple times to process each item in the batch.

                                            – David
                                            Oct 12 '15 at 19:29













                                          • is this answer valid at all??

                                            – prayagupd
                                            Mar 13 '17 at 2:42








                                          6




                                          6





                                          No, it won't, ever. A normal Statement (not PrepareStatement) object has to do ALL the same things a PreparedStatement does and is in fact a wrapper around PreparedStatement that actually does the prepared part as well. The difference between the two is that a Statement object silently prepares the statement and validates it every time you execute it, where as a prepared statement only does that once and then can be executed multiple times to process each item in the batch.

                                          – David
                                          Oct 12 '15 at 19:29







                                          No, it won't, ever. A normal Statement (not PrepareStatement) object has to do ALL the same things a PreparedStatement does and is in fact a wrapper around PreparedStatement that actually does the prepared part as well. The difference between the two is that a Statement object silently prepares the statement and validates it every time you execute it, where as a prepared statement only does that once and then can be executed multiple times to process each item in the batch.

                                          – David
                                          Oct 12 '15 at 19:29















                                          is this answer valid at all??

                                          – prayagupd
                                          Mar 13 '17 at 2:42





                                          is this answer valid at all??

                                          – prayagupd
                                          Mar 13 '17 at 2:42











                                          -9














                                          Batch insert using statement



                                          int a= 100;
                                          try {
                                          for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
                                          String insert = "insert into usermaster"
                                          + "("
                                          + "userid"
                                          + ")"
                                          + "values("
                                          + "'" + a + "'"
                                          + ");";
                                          statement.addBatch(insert);
                                          System.out.println(insert);
                                          a++;
                                          }
                                          dbConnection.commit();
                                          } catch (SQLException e) {
                                          System.out.println(" Insert Failed");
                                          System.out.println(e.getMessage());
                                          } finally {

                                          if (statement != null) {
                                          statement.close();
                                          }
                                          if (dbConnection != null) {
                                          dbConnection.close();
                                          }
                                          }





                                          share|improve this answer



















                                          • 20





                                            Oh, Yes. Little Bobby Tables...

                                            – Daniel Dinnyes
                                            Sep 2 '13 at 14:42











                                          • Dynamic statements are almost always a bad idea. Both for security (although it is not the case in this very simple example) and performance.

                                            – frroland
                                            May 18 '15 at 12:51
















                                          -9














                                          Batch insert using statement



                                          int a= 100;
                                          try {
                                          for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
                                          String insert = "insert into usermaster"
                                          + "("
                                          + "userid"
                                          + ")"
                                          + "values("
                                          + "'" + a + "'"
                                          + ");";
                                          statement.addBatch(insert);
                                          System.out.println(insert);
                                          a++;
                                          }
                                          dbConnection.commit();
                                          } catch (SQLException e) {
                                          System.out.println(" Insert Failed");
                                          System.out.println(e.getMessage());
                                          } finally {

                                          if (statement != null) {
                                          statement.close();
                                          }
                                          if (dbConnection != null) {
                                          dbConnection.close();
                                          }
                                          }





                                          share|improve this answer



















                                          • 20





                                            Oh, Yes. Little Bobby Tables...

                                            – Daniel Dinnyes
                                            Sep 2 '13 at 14:42











                                          • Dynamic statements are almost always a bad idea. Both for security (although it is not the case in this very simple example) and performance.

                                            – frroland
                                            May 18 '15 at 12:51














                                          -9












                                          -9








                                          -9







                                          Batch insert using statement



                                          int a= 100;
                                          try {
                                          for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
                                          String insert = "insert into usermaster"
                                          + "("
                                          + "userid"
                                          + ")"
                                          + "values("
                                          + "'" + a + "'"
                                          + ");";
                                          statement.addBatch(insert);
                                          System.out.println(insert);
                                          a++;
                                          }
                                          dbConnection.commit();
                                          } catch (SQLException e) {
                                          System.out.println(" Insert Failed");
                                          System.out.println(e.getMessage());
                                          } finally {

                                          if (statement != null) {
                                          statement.close();
                                          }
                                          if (dbConnection != null) {
                                          dbConnection.close();
                                          }
                                          }





                                          share|improve this answer













                                          Batch insert using statement



                                          int a= 100;
                                          try {
                                          for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
                                          String insert = "insert into usermaster"
                                          + "("
                                          + "userid"
                                          + ")"
                                          + "values("
                                          + "'" + a + "'"
                                          + ");";
                                          statement.addBatch(insert);
                                          System.out.println(insert);
                                          a++;
                                          }
                                          dbConnection.commit();
                                          } catch (SQLException e) {
                                          System.out.println(" Insert Failed");
                                          System.out.println(e.getMessage());
                                          } finally {

                                          if (statement != null) {
                                          statement.close();
                                          }
                                          if (dbConnection != null) {
                                          dbConnection.close();
                                          }
                                          }






                                          share|improve this answer












                                          share|improve this answer



                                          share|improve this answer










                                          answered Jun 12 '13 at 9:46









                                          PD Shah 5382PD Shah 5382

                                          34




                                          34








                                          • 20





                                            Oh, Yes. Little Bobby Tables...

                                            – Daniel Dinnyes
                                            Sep 2 '13 at 14:42











                                          • Dynamic statements are almost always a bad idea. Both for security (although it is not the case in this very simple example) and performance.

                                            – frroland
                                            May 18 '15 at 12:51














                                          • 20





                                            Oh, Yes. Little Bobby Tables...

                                            – Daniel Dinnyes
                                            Sep 2 '13 at 14:42











                                          • Dynamic statements are almost always a bad idea. Both for security (although it is not the case in this very simple example) and performance.

                                            – frroland
                                            May 18 '15 at 12:51








                                          20




                                          20





                                          Oh, Yes. Little Bobby Tables...

                                          – Daniel Dinnyes
                                          Sep 2 '13 at 14:42





                                          Oh, Yes. Little Bobby Tables...

                                          – Daniel Dinnyes
                                          Sep 2 '13 at 14:42













                                          Dynamic statements are almost always a bad idea. Both for security (although it is not the case in this very simple example) and performance.

                                          – frroland
                                          May 18 '15 at 12:51





                                          Dynamic statements are almost always a bad idea. Both for security (although it is not the case in this very simple example) and performance.

                                          – frroland
                                          May 18 '15 at 12:51


















                                          draft saved

                                          draft discarded




















































                                          Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid



                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f3784197%2fefficient-way-to-do-batch-inserts-with-jdbc%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                          }
                                          );

                                          Post as a guest















                                          Required, but never shown





















































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown

































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          Bressuire

                                          Vorschmack

                                          Quarantine