| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Phil Currier <pcurrier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: logical column ordering |
| Date: | 2014-12-11 03:08:49 |
| Message-ID: | 54890AC1.8060701@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/09/2014 09:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> Question on COPY, though: there's reasons why people would want COPY to
>> dump in either physical or logical order. If you're doing COPY to
>> create CSV files for output, then you want the columns in logical order.
>> If you're doing COPY for pg_dump, then you want them in physical order
>> for faster dump/reload. So we're almost certainly going to need to have
>> an option for COPY.
>
> This is complete nonsense, Josh, or at least it is until you can provide
> some solid evidence to believe that column ordering would make any
> noticeable performance difference in COPY. I know of no reason to believe
> that the existing user-defined-column-ordering option makes any difference.
Chill, dude, chill. When we have a patch, I'll do some performance
testing, and we'll see if it's something we care about or not. There's
no reason to be belligerent about it.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2014-12-11 03:09:01 | Re: inherit support for foreign tables |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2014-12-11 03:06:28 | Re: logical column ordering |