Amazon Redshift: Bulk Insert vs COPYing from S3

Amazon Redshift: Bulk Insert vs COPYing from S3

In the world of data management, performance is paramount. Amazon Redshift, a fully managed, petabyte-scale data warehouse service, offers multiple ways to insert data. Two of the most commonly used methods are the traditional SQL INSERT operation and the COPY command. This blog post is a deep dive into these methods, specifically focusing on their performance and efficiency.

What is Bulk Insert?

Bulk insert is a process that adds multiple rows into a table in your database. It uses the SQL INSERT statement. For Redshift, it would look something like this:

INSERT INTO table_name (column1, column2, …)
VALUES
    (value1, value2, …),
    (value1, value2, …),
    …;

The INSERT command in Amazon Redshift is flexible and straightforward, and it’s what most people starting with Redshift might gravitate towards. However, the INSERT operation is a row-by-row operation, meaning it inserts one row at a time into the table. This can be inefficient and slow, especially when dealing with large amounts of data.

What is COPYing from S3?

The COPY command, on the other hand, is a more efficient way to load large amounts of data. It loads data in parallel from Amazon S3, EMR, DynamoDB, or remote hosts. Here’s an example of a COPY command:

COPY table_name 
FROM 's3://bucket_name/object_path' 
credentials 
'aws_access_key_id=<Your-Access-Key-ID>;aws_secret_access_key=<Your-Secret-Access-Key>' 
delimiter ',' 
region 'us-west-2';

The COPY command reads multiple files simultaneously (or parts of a large file) and automatically manages the distribution of data across all compute nodes.

Performance Comparison: Bulk Insert vs COPYing from S3

To illustrate the difference in performance, let’s consider a scenario where we have a million rows to insert. Using the INSERT command, these would be added one at a time, which could take hours. On the other hand, the COPY command can load the same volume of data in minutes or even less.

Why such a massive difference? The INSERT command needs to make a round trip to the server for each row, while COPY can process multiple rows in parallel. This makes COPY significantly faster and more efficient, especially when handling large datasets.

Use Cases for Bulk Insert and COPYing

While COPY outperforms INSERT in most situations, there are still cases where INSERT might be preferred. For small datasets or occasional inserts, INSERT can be simpler and more convenient. It doesn’t require the data to be in S3 and can be used directly in SQL commands.

COPY, in contrast, is ideal for large-scale data loads, ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) processes, and data migration. When data is already in S3 or can be easily moved there, COPY is the optimal choice.

Conclusion

In the end, the choice between bulk INSERT and COPYing from S3 comes down to your specific use-case. For large-scale data operations, the COPY command’s superior speed and efficiency make it the recommended choice. For smaller, more ad-hoc operations, INSERT might suffice.

Remember, optimizing your data operations is a critical step in ensuring your data infrastructure can scale effectively and efficiently. Be sure to consider your options and choose the method that best suits your needs.

Keywords: Amazon Redshift, Bulk Insert, COPYing from S3, Data Management, ETL, Data Migration, Large-Scale Data Operations

About Saturn Cloud

Saturn Cloud is your all-in-one solution for data science & ML development, deployment, and data pipelines in the cloud. Spin up a notebook with 4TB of RAM, add a GPU, connect to a distributed cluster of workers, and more. Join today and get 150 hours of free compute per month.