Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations

On Sat, Mar 29, 2025 at 9:49 AM David G. Johnston
<david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 8:28 PM Sutou Kouhei <kou(at)clear-code(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> The attached v39 patch set uses the followings:
>>
>> 0001: Create copyto_internal.h and change COPY_XXX to
>> COPY_SOURCE_XXX and COPY_DEST_XXX accordingly.
>> (Same as 1. in your suggestion)
>> 0002: Support custom format for both COPY TO and COPY FROM.
>> (Same as 2. in your suggestion)
>> 0003: Expose necessary helper functions such as CopySendEndOfRow()
>> and add CopyFromSkipErrorRow().
>> (3. + 4. in your suggestion)
>> 0004: Define handler functions for built-in formats.
>> (Not included in your suggestion)
>> 0005: Documentation. (WIP)
>> (Same as 5. in your suggestion)
>>
>
> I prefer keeping 0002 and 0004 separate. In particular, keeping the design choice of "unqualified internal format names ignore search_path" should stand out as its own commit.

What is the point of having separate commits for already-agreed design
choices? I guess that it would make it easier to revert that decision.
But I think it makes more sense that if we agree with "unqualified
internal format names ignore search_path" the original commit includes
that decision and describes it in the commit message. If we want to
change that design based on the discussion later on, we can have a
separate commit that makes that change and has the link to the
discussion.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com