On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Adrian Klaver <adrian.kla...@aklaver.com> wrote: > > A test case here confirms it sends individual INSERTS: > > test_(postgres)# insert into fdw_test_table select * from fdw_test; > INSERT 0 3 > > Where fdw_test_table is the remote table and fdw_test is the local one. > > postgres-2018-04-11 11:29:23.812 PDT-0LOG: statement: insert into > fdw_test_table select * from fdw_test; > postgres-2018-04-11 11:29:23.812 PDT-0LOG: execute pgsql_fdw_prep_2: > INSERT INTO public.fdw_test_rcv(id, fld_1, fld_2) VALUES ($1, $2, $3) > postgres-2018-04-11 11:29:23.812 PDT-0DETAIL: parameters: $1 = '1', $2 = > 'one', $3 = 't' > postgres-2018-04-11 11:29:23.813 PDT-10140LOG: execute pgsql_fdw_prep_2: > INSERT INTO public.fdw_test_rcv(id, fld_1, fld_2) VALUES ($1, $2, $3) > postgres-2018-04-11 11:29:23.813 PDT-10140DETAIL: parameters: $1 = '2', > $2 = 'two', $3 = 'f' > postgres-2018-04-11 11:29:23.813 PDT-10140LOG: execute pgsql_fdw_prep_2: > INSERT INTO public.fdw_test_rcv(id, fld_1, fld_2) VALUES ($1, $2, $3) > postgres-2018-04-11 11:29:23.813 PDT-10140DETAIL: parameters: $1 = '3', > $2 = 'three', $3 = 'f' > > So much for that idea(:=
Yeah, I saw the same with a 132 row insert. Now imagine that with a monthly 50 million row insert or delete. :p Thanks for the confirmation! I'm definitely leaning towards the copy/load/delete method. Don. -- Don Seiler www.seiler.us
