Dany M wrote:

> I would like to make another suggestion to your problem. This "table
> toggling" stuff seems very awkward to me.

Well... It's a very simple way to make sure the batch doesn't block the
production web site. :-) (But it does cause a slowdown...)

> Depending on how the new data looks compared to the old data; if it is
> quite similar (an update)

The table contains all officially registered companies in Sweden, about
1 million records. The update contains all changes in these registers
and will touch about 20-50 thousand records (there will be deletes,
updates and inserts). I need the website to get a consistent view, i.e.
all records as before the update or all records as after the update.
Seing a partially updated table is not good. So, that would require a
large update transaction or some kind of explicit flagging and
versioning. Neither seems tempting.

> you could expose the new data to the server
> via an external table.

The new data is already in the same db but comes in four different
tables that are merged into the single (toggled) one.

> If there is a invariant id in the data.

There is.

Thank you for the suggestion. I will consider an in-place update
approach, but I think the toggle is probably a ebtter solution this time.

Kjell
--
--------------------------------------
Kjell Rilbe
Adressmarknaden AM AB
E-post: kjell.rilbe@...
Telefon: 08-761 06 55
Mobil: 0733-44 24 64