Thank you. Let me test it and see the benefit. We have a use case for this.
> On Oct 10, 2018, at 17:18 , Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>
>
>
> On October 10, 2018 2:15:19 PM PDT, Ravi Krishna <srkrishna1@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> pg_restore doesn't take locks on the table for the COPY, it does so
>>> because creating the table takes an exclusive lock.
>>
>>
>> Interesting. I seem to recollect reading here that I can't have
>> concurrent COPY on the same table because of the lock.
>> To give an example:
>>
>> If I have a large file with say 400 million rows, can I first split it
>> into 10 files of 40 million rows each and then fire up 10 different
>> COPY sessions , each reading from a split file, but copying into the
>> same table. I thought not. It will be great if we can do this.
>
> Yes, you can.
>
> Andres
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
