From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Woodward <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, Zoltan Boszormenyi <zboszor(at)dunaweb(dot)hu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] psql -A (unaligned format) eats too much |
Date: | 2006-06-05 17:03:24 |
Message-ID: | 448463DC.8030306@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Mark Woodward wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Wouldn't the "COPY (select ...) TO STDOUT" format being discussed solve
>>> this for free?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> It won't solve it in the general case for clients that expect a result
>> set. ISTM that "use a cursor" is a perfectly reasonable answer, though.
>>
>
> I'm not sure I agree -- surprise!
>
> psql is often used as a command line tool and using a cursor is not
> acceptable.
>
> Granted, with an unaligned output, perhaps psql should not buffer the
> WHOLE result at once, but without rewriting that behavior, a COPY from
> query may be close enough.
>
>
You have missed my point. Surprise!
I didn't say it wasn't OK in the psql case, I said it wasn't helpful in
the case of *other* libpq clients.
Expecting clients generally to split and interpret COPY output is not
reasonable, but if they want large result sets they should use a cursor.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zoltan Boszormenyi | 2006-06-05 17:17:31 | Re: [PERFORM] psql -A (unaligned format) eats too much |
Previous Message | Mark Woodward | 2006-06-05 17:01:45 | Re: [PERFORM] psql -A (unaligned format) eats too much |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zoltan Boszormenyi | 2006-06-05 17:17:31 | Re: [PERFORM] psql -A (unaligned format) eats too much |
Previous Message | Mark Woodward | 2006-06-05 17:01:45 | Re: [PERFORM] psql -A (unaligned format) eats too much |