Re: Q: SQL Load vs. Embedded SQL (Pro C) for Updating Large Table

Terry Felton wrote:
>
> We have a need to move about 1 million records from an unindexed
> table into another table each day. The second table contains 15 - 30
> million records. We have had to drop the indexes from the first table in
> order to keep up loading it using a Pro C application, but know that
> we've just shifted the index delay to when we move the the data into the
> indexed table.
>
> What are the advantages of SQL Load in this situation? Does it
> completely lock the receiving table during the load? Is the reindexing
> significently faster that using embedded SQL? What are the pitfalls of
> using SQL Load? Might there be other options to consider?

Have you tried using the 'direct' path of loading? To do so, use direct=true on your sqlload command line. This method is considerably faster than non-direct. There are some pitfalls, if the data you're loading is guaranteed to match all your constraints you should be fine. If it doesn't the direct path is not for you....direct path sort of ignores all constraints and just "dumps" the data into your table. If constraints are violated, I've see the load lock the table up .... good luck! Received on Sun Mar 10 1996 - 00:00:00 CET