| From: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] WITH DELIMITERS in COPY |
| Date: | 2002-03-05 10:21:58 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0203052058060.18954-100000@linuxworld.com.au |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Hi Bruce,
On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Seems the original title about "feature causes performance in COPY" was
> confusing.
Oops.
> This patch merely fixes the identified TODO item in the
> grammar about using WITH in COPY.
Now that I look at this patch again I don't think I like the
syntax.
COPY [BINARY] <relation> [WITH OIDS] TO | FROM <file> [[USING DELIMITERS |
WITH DELIMITER] <delimiter> [WITH NULL AS <char>]
It isn't very elegant.
1) I forced the parser to be able to handle multiple WITHs, but that
doesn't mean its right. I can't remember why I didn't propose a better
syntax back then, such as:
... [WITH [DELIMITER <delimiter>,] [NULL AS <char>]]
2) Given (1), Why does WITH OIDS belong where it is now? Why not have it
as an 'option' at the end?
Anyone have any opinion on this?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pa O'Clerigh | 2002-03-05 11:26:46 | Help Wanted for running C code |
| Previous Message | info | 2002-03-05 10:08:14 | FW: Re: [JDBC] DB mirroring |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2002-03-05 13:44:47 | Re: [PATCHES] new hash function |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-03-05 06:50:22 | Re: ALTER TABLE OWNER: change indexes |