Re: [PATCHES] WIP patch - INSERT-able log statements

Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> 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