From: | Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail(at)webthatworks(dot)it> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: batch insert/update |
Date: | 2007-12-26 22:17:21 |
Message-ID: | 20071226231721.52ddace5@webthatworks.it |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 20:48:27 +0100
Andreas Kretschmer <akretschmer(at)spamfence(dot)net> wrote:
> blackwater dev <blackwaterdev(at)gmail(dot)com> schrieb:
>
> > I have some php code that will be pulling in a file via ftp.
> > This file will contain 20,000+ records that I then need to pump
> > into the postgres db. These records will represent a subset of
> > the records in a certain table. I basically need an efficient
> > way to pump these rows into the table, replacing matching rows
> > (based on id) already there and inserting ones that aren't. Sort
> > of looping through the result and inserting or updating based on
> > the presents of the row, what is the best way to handle this?
> > This is something that will run nightly.
> Insert you data to a extra table and work with regular SQL to
> insert/update the destination table. You can use COPY to insert the
> data into your extra table, this works very fast, but you need a
> suitable file format for this.
What if you know in advance what are the row that should be inserted
and you've a batch of rows that should be updated?
Is it still the fasted system to insert them all in a temp table with
copy?
What about the one that have to be updated if you've all the columns,
not just the changed ones?
Is it faster to delete & insert or to update?
updates comes with the same pk as the destination table.
thx
--
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
http://www.webthatworks.it
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Harrison | 2007-12-27 15:49:10 | Any big slony and WAL shipping users? |
Previous Message | Thomas Hart | 2007-12-26 22:12:37 | Re: batch insert/update |