Jim Starkey wrote:

> Vlad Khorsun wrote:
>
>>> If the server knew it was a bulk load, it could lock the table, load the
>>> data, and build the indexes using a sort and fast load / fast merge
>>> algorithm (more or less equivalent to dropping the indexes, loading, and
>>> redefining the indexes but easier). On the other hand, "locking the
>>> table" isn't exactly a classic concept.
>>>
>>>
>> Hmm, why do we need to lock the table ?
>>
>>
> If indexes are completely disabled, no. Otherwise the records will
> appear no to be there. If the load is done under a single transaction,
> however, this isn't an issue.

And what about duplicate keys handling?


Adriano