From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe |
Date: | 2006-05-31 20:10:32 |
Message-ID: | 15060.1149106232@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
> My COPY WITH COMPRESSION is not the same as taking a copy file and
> zipping it; it creates a copy file with BinarySignature that has
> compressed bytes in the data part, thus it can be handled by any client
> app that can stream binary copy files from/to the server.
If you mean you're compressing each data field separately, that's surely
a very bad idea. If you mean you're compressing everything except the
file header, I fail to see the value. Binary is binary. I *seriously*
doubt there are clients out there that look for a PGCOPY header before
deciding whether to send the file to the server or not. And a client
that did know that much about a PGCOPY file would likely spit up on a
critical flag it didn't recognize, anyway.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-31 20:10:42 | Re: Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2006-05-31 20:08:43 | Re: Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe |