Re: tracking scripts...

I'm not an expert,
I would think if you can spare using only one transaction , it would be
way way faster to do it !

the system simply could skip keeping log to be ready to roll back for a 1
billion row update !

Of course it would be preferable to use psql to execute statement by
statement as separate transactions , and do it with X several parallel psql
(splitting the big text file into X parts), yet Joey seemed reluctant to
use console =)

Cheers,
Rémi-C

2013/11/27 Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>

> 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
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>