From: Worky Workerson <worky.workerson@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Bulk loading/merging
Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 15:04:59 -0400
Message-ID: <ce4072df0605261204o7f027120m70b16c2f796cce5b@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ce4072df0605261148g4ec22267gc54b6b445e47c855@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ce4072df0605261148g4ec22267gc54b6b445e47c855@mail.gmail.com>
Another little question ... would using any sort of TEMP table help out, i.e.
loading the unaggregated data into a TEMP table, aggregating the data via a
SELECT INTO another TEMP table, and then finally INSERT ... SELECT into the
master, aggregated, triggered table? It seems like this might be a win if
A) the TEMP tables fit into memory, and B) the load data aggregates well.
Worst case (i.e. all unique data in the load) seems like it might take much
longer, however, since I'm creating 2 new TEMP tables ....
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: worky.workerson@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Bulk loading/merging
In-Reply-To: <ce4072df0605261204o7f027120m70b16c2f796cce5b@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox