X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E19552A81 for ; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:58:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 97103-01 for ; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:58:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (rwcrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.198.39]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 772BD52997 for ; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:58:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.1.52] (c-24-60-119-214.hsd1.ma.comcast.net[24.60.119.214]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc13) with ESMTP id <20050721155850015001v13ce>; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:58:51 +0000 Message-ID: <42DFC641.1020404@comcast.net> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 11:58:57 -0400 From: Jeffrey Tenny User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040616 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: What is best way to stream terabytes of data into postgresql? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.295 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, DNS_FROM_RFC_POST X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200507/341 X-Sequence-Number: 13582 Preferably via JDBC, but by C/C++ if necessary. Streaming being the operative word. Tips appreciated.