Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The arguments for COPY are performance and that you don't need to specify 
> the table name.  INSERT is slower and you need a name, but it's easier to 
> build a UNIX tool style pipeline to import it in real-time.

I can't believe that any production situation could tolerate the
overhead of one-commit-per-log-line.  So a realistic tool for this
is going to have to be able to wrap blocks of maybe 100 or 1000 or so
log lines with BEGIN/COMMIT, and that is exactly as difficult as
wrapping them with a COPY command.  Thus, I disbelieve your argument.
We should not be designing this around an assumed use-case that will
only work for toy installations.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to