Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F03C5475A09 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:56:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from rs-pi.com (unknown [193.95.196.91]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADEF1475843 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:56:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from spot (fw.rs-pi.com [193.95.196.154]) by rs-pi.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 60A5D8D8E; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 17:01:12 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <013101c2ab64$d368df60$1100a8c0@rspi> From: "Nikola Ivacic" To: "Tom Lane" Cc: "Ales Kuclar" , References: <007d01c2ab36$85d92760$1100a8c0@rspi> <19755.1040743489@sss.pgh.pa.us> Subject: Re: COPY command problems Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:55:05 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200212/268 X-Sequence-Number: 10856 It must be internal error: two reasons: 1.) the original file is OK (I checked with grep + there is no network envolved) 2.) Error has strange patern: it substitutes 0x31 with 0x21 (1 with !) also 0x34 with 0x24 (4 with $) and 0x39 with 0x29 (9 with ) ) so I guess you are right. can you suggest some tools for FreeBSD to test RAM, because I think the hard disk is ok. p.s. right now I am testing it with splited file thanks Nikola ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Lane" To: "Nikola Ivacic" Cc: Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 4:24 PM Subject: Re: [SQL] COPY command problems > "Nikola Ivacic" writes: > > Has somebody experienced difficulties using COPY command on large files. > > I have a large (250MB) file and each time I insert records I've got one or = > > more (< 30 of cca 1079000) corrupted > > records. The number of corrupted records is not constant (i.e. 1, 30, 7, 23= > > etc..) > > I'd bet on flaky hardware --- have you run memory and disk tests? If > the COPY data is passing across a network, then network problems are > also worthy of suspicion. > > regards, tom lane >