From: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | "John R Pierce *EXTERN*" <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: tracking scripts... |
Date: | 2013-11-27 09:07:44 |
Message-ID: | A737B7A37273E048B164557ADEF4A58B17C60994@ntex2010i.host.magwien.gv.at |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
John R Pierce wrote:
> On 11/26/2013 9:24 AM, Joey Quinn wrote:
>> When I ran that command (select * from pg_stat_activity"), it returned
>> the first six lines of the scripts. I'm fairly sure it has gotten a
>> bit beyond that (been running over 24 hours now, and the size has
>> increased about 300 GB). Am I missing something for it to tell me what
>> the last line processed was?
>
> that means your GUI lobbed the entire file at postgres in a single
> PQexec call, so its all being executed as a single statement.
>
> psql -f "filename.sql" dbname would have processed the queries one at
> a time.
Yes, but that would slow down processing considerably, which would
not help in this case.
I'd opt for
psql -1 -f "filename.sql" dbname
so it all runs in a single transaction.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Karsten Hilbert | 2013-11-27 09:14:00 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade ?deficiency |
Previous Message | Rémi Cura | 2013-11-27 08:20:40 | Re: tracking scripts... |