Alon Goldshuv wrote:
> 9) allow for Simon's WAL bypass.
> 
> I have surely missed some problems that hide behind the idea, but these
> points make me believe that LOAD DATA is a good idea.

The community is unlikely to add a new LOAD DATA command that does
_almost_ everything COPY does.  We are much more likely to incrementally
improve COPY.

The problem with a new command is that it becomes unclear when you
should use COPY and when LOAD DATA, and it confuses users, and has
maintenance overhead.  If Bizgres wants a new command name, go for it,
but it is unlikely that the community release is going to go in that
direction, unless there is a fundamental agreement that COPY is broken
and needs a major revamp, and I have heard no talk of that.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

• Re: NOLOGGING option, or ? at 2005-06-01 17:35:30 from Alon Goldshuv

Responses

• Re: NOLOGGING option, or ? at 2005-06-01 22:18:41 from Luke Lonergan

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2005-06-01 22:05:13
	Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Previous:	From: Marc G. Fournier	Date: 2005-06-01 21:45:07
	Subject: Re: Google's Summer of Code ...