On Wed, 2006-05-24 at 07:41 -0400, Kenneth Downs wrote: > > > Why not have the INSERT go to an "inbox" table, a table whose only job > is to receive the data for future processing. Actually, it 'sort of' works that way. > Your client code should mark all rows with a batch number as they go > in. Then when the batch is loaded, simply invoke a stored procedure to > process them. Pass the stored procedure the batch number. If I have that stored procedure and if I issue command that would launch such stored procedure from "psql>" prompt: how long will I have to wait for another prompt? 1) until the procedure ends its job. 2) right away, the procedure does its job unabidedly 'in the background'. My impression was, that I get the next prompt after the procedure finishes, so it wouldn't be a solution. But if (2) applies, that is really it.... Frankly, it would take me some time to get back to those sources (and generate simulation data) - so anybody knows the answer? -R
