From: | Pierre Frédéric Caillaud <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Emmanuel Cecchet" <manu(at)asterdata(dot)com>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: COPY enhancements |
Date: | 2009-09-11 15:32:40 |
Message-ID: | op.uz3msqm9cke6l8@soyouz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I was thinking something like:
>
> COPY tablename [ ( column [, ...] ) ] FROM { 'filename' | STDIN }
> [WITH] [option [, ...]]
>
> Where:
>
> option := ColId [Sconst] | FORCE NOT NULL (column [,...])
>
> I don't see any reasonable way to sandwhich the FORCE NOT NULL syntax
> into a keyword/value notation.
Postgres has a hstore data type which seems well suited for passing
key/value option pairs...
Why another syntax to remember, another parser to code, when almost
everything is already there ?
Think about plpgsql code which generates some SQL COPY command string,
then this is parsed and executed... wouldn't it be a lot simpler to just
manipulate parameters in a hstore ?...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-09-11 15:33:38 | Re: COPY enhancements |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-09-11 15:29:22 | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |