Re: Sql*load with named piped giving no performance increase. What's wrong?

Why do you think it should be faster? By using less disk space?

Yong Huang
yong321_at_yahoo.com

davenport_at_hotmail.com (daven) wrote in message news:<3b687836$0$32492$45beb828_at_newscene.com>...
> With out a named pipe process takes ~20 minutes, the cut runs first then the
> sqlloader program starts after cut finishes
>
> we create a named pipe and then have the cut program feed the sqlloader
> program we notice that the sqlloader program starts up right away. however
> the total time is still ~20 are we doing anything worng?
Received on Wed Aug 01 2001 - 22:53:25 CDT