RE: Faster option than utl_file
- From: "Guang Mei" <GMei@xxxxxx>
- To: <jdunn@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:09:42 -0500
If you can use sqlplus to do the job, I found that spool is faster than
utl_file.
Or you can use perl's print , it is faster than utl_file.
But if you have to use utl_file, instead of writing out each short line, you
can concate the string to make it long enough, then write it out once (the
limit is something like 32K).
HTH.
Guang
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of John Dunn
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 11:04 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Faster option than utl_file
I find utl_file too slow for reading and writing large text files.
In fact it seems faster to read/write files from a Windows Visual Basic
client application over NFS then to read/write using utl_file on the server.
Is there a faster alternative? Or any way to tune utl_file?
Platform is Oracle 9i on AIX 5.
John
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
