Benjamin Arai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why is a trigger faster than doing a ALTER after table is created? I
> thought a trigger would be slower because it would be invoked every
> iteration (a new row is inserted) during the COPY process.
Yeah, you'd have the trigger overhead, but the above argument ignores
the costs of the full-table UPDATE --- not to mention the VACUUM
you'll need after the UPDATE to clean up the dead rows.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
