Re: surppressing column names in COPY format

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
Cc: "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: surppressing column names in COPY format
Date: 2003-07-31 20:50:37
Message-ID: 18929.1059684637@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 15:18, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't really agree that we've "lost functionality" here, though ---
>> you might as well claim that it's a bug that the COPY command forces
>> you to restore the data into a particular table.

> By that logic then what is the point of allowing data dumped as INSERTS
> both with and without column names?

None; we just haven't gotten around to removing code that no longer
pulls its weight. The no-column-name variant is just as dangerous as
it was in the COPY case, IMHO.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Nixon 2003-07-31 20:53:16 CAST INTERVAL to INT??
Previous Message Robert Treat 2003-07-31 20:33:29 Re: surppressing column names in COPY format