Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)


From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Date: 2013-01-14 03:34:33
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
>   Attached is a patch to add a 'COMPRESSED' option to COPY which will
>   cause COPY to expect a gzip'd file on input and which will output a
>   gzip'd file on output.  Included is support for backend COPY, psql's
>   \copy, regression tests for both, and documentation.

I don't think it's a very good idea to invent such a specialized option,
nor to tie it to gzip, which is widely considered to be old news.

There was discussion (and, I think, a patch in the queue) for allowing
COPY to pipe into or out of an arbitrary shell pipe.  Why would that not
be enough to cover this use-case?  That is, instead of a hard-wired
capability, people would do something like COPY TO '| gzip >file.gz'.
Or they could use bzip2 or whatever struck their fancy.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Gurjeet SinghDate: 2013-01-14 03:42:09
Subject: Re: count(*) of zero rows returns 1
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2013-01-14 03:27:12
Subject: Re: Possible PANIC in PostPrepare_Locks

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group