On Fri, 2005-06-24 at 00:52, 李江华 wrote:
> David Bear:
> Yes. I agree with you.
> \copy is really too brittle.
> I wonder why \copy is not like oracle's sqlldr?
> I think sqlldr is more powerful. When using sqlldr,we can specify the maximum error records we allow,and we can also specify the number we should commit in every transaction.
While I wouldn't mind have the versatility of sqlldr, I would HATE to
have to deal with such a clunky interface. The only features of sqlldr
I actually like are the ones that allow rejected records to go into a
But like most of oracle's tools, it's awkward to use, and requires a lot
of up front work even if you only want a simple load. Sure, add some
features to \copy, but don't emulate the WAY those features are
> Another aspect is also important. Oracle has better partition table facilities,it's especially suitable for large tables,as well as index partition concepts.But PostgreSQL has no such concepts.These are really important for large database.
No one would complain if someone stepped up and programmed a decent
table partitioning patch. I have a feeling it's one of the things on
the TODO list that will happen in the next version or two.
In response to
pgsql-admin by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2005-06-24 14:55:56|
|Subject: Re: unicode|
|Previous:||From: Tim.Shenton||Date: 2005-06-24 13:54:27|
|Subject: Re: symlinking pg_xlog|