Sorry. I thought I had cut most of the redundancy > On Aug 11, 2019, at 2:26 AM, Peter J. Holzer <hjp-pgsql@xxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 2019-08-10 21:01:50 -0600, Rob Sargent wrote: >> On Aug 10, 2019, at 8:47 PM, Souvik Bhattacherjee <kivuosb@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Adrian, >> >> Thanks for the response. >> >>> Yes, but you will some code via client or function that batches the >>> inserts for you. >> >> Could you please elaborate a bit on how EXP 1 could be performed such that >> it uses bulk inserts? >> >> Best, >> -SB >> >> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 7:26 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> > [70 lines of full quote removed] > > >> Top-posting (i.e. putting your reply at the top is discouraged here) > > He didn't really top-post. He quoted the relevant part of Adrian's > posting and then wrote his reply below that. This is the style I prefer, > because it makes it really clear what one is replying to. > > After his reply, he quoted Adrian's posting again, this time completely. > I think this is unnecessary and confusing (you apparently didn't even > see that he quoted something above his reply). But it's not as bad as > quoting everything below the answer (or - as you did - quoting > everything before the answer which I think is even worse: If I don't see > any original content within the first 100 lines or so I usually skip the > rest). > > hp > > -- > _ | Peter J. Holzer | we build much bigger, better disasters now > |_|_) | | because we have much more sophisticated > | | | hjp@xxxxxx | management tools. > __/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- Ross Anderson <https://www.edge.org/>
