From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Mark Dilger <pgsql(at)markdilger(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: utf8 COPY DELIMITER? |
Date: | 2007-04-18 16:38:06 |
Message-ID: | 20070418163806.GS72669@nasby.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 02:28:18PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I doubt that supporting a single multibyte character would be an
> interesting extension --- if we wanted to do anything at all there, we'd
> just generalize the delimiter to be an arbitrary string. But it would
> certainly slow down COPY by some amount, which is an area where you'll
> get push-back for performance losses, so you'd need to make a convincing
> use-case for it.
Couldn't we use a fast code path (what we have now) for the case when
the delimiter is a single byte? That would allow for multi-character
delimiters without penalizing those that don't use them.
As for use case, I worked on migrating some stuff out of a MySQL
database a while ago, and having arbitrary string delimiters would have
made life easier.
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Treat | 2007-04-18 16:51:48 | Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-04-18 16:37:04 | Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout |