Re: Restore v. Running COPY/INDEX seperatly - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Restore v. Running COPY/INDEX seperatly
Date
Msg-id 278.1188226766@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Restore v. Running COPY/INDEX seperatly  (Benjamin Arai <me@benjaminarai.com>)
Responses Re: Restore v. Running COPY/INDEX seperatly  (Benjamin Arai <me@benjaminarai.com>)
List pgsql-general
Benjamin Arai <me@benjaminarai.com> writes:
> Why is a trigger faster than doing a ALTER after table is created?  I
> thought a trigger would be slower because it would be invoked every
> iteration (a new row is inserted) during the COPY process.

Yeah, you'd have the trigger overhead, but the above argument ignores
the costs of the full-table UPDATE --- not to mention the VACUUM
you'll need after the UPDATE to clean up the dead rows.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Vivek Khera
Date:
Subject: Re: Bigtime scaling of Postgresql (cluster and stuff I suppose)
Next
From: Andrew Sullivan
Date:
Subject: Re: Bigtime scaling of Postgresql (cluster and stuff I suppose)