Re: Regarding COPY command from Postgres 8.2.0

From: "Evan Carroll" <lists(at)evancarroll(dot)com>
To: "soni de" <soni(dot)de(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Regarding COPY command from Postgres 8.2.0
Date: 2007-09-18 14:53:28
Message-ID: 428b865e0709180753t5f96c1eex2bed6d9d9a17c7fa@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On 9/17/07, soni de <soni(dot)de(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> We have upgraded postgres from 7.2.4 to 8.2.0.

This is one of the joys of 8.x over 7.2.x think of it like a different
sql product rather than an "upgrade." Its foundations are different.
7.4.x is still supported, and would have been a smoother upgrade for
you with less deprecations removed. To insert such a feature dependent
on column order without it being implied in the spec would be surely
be something deprecated quite quickly.

> We have program which executes COPY command and our new database is changed
> having some extra columns in some tables.
> Because of this, COPY commands are failing.
> So, we wanted the option to COPY the data without specifying column names.
>

The only way I can see a request, that allows for such bad-practice,
being approved would be if you were to use the '*' operator elegantly;
and, even then it would require you to update your code, only slightly
to a lesser degree than writing the column names.

Evan Carroll

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Scott Marlowe 2007-09-18 15:04:52 Re: Regarding COPY command from Postgres 8.2.0
Previous Message Dave Dutcher 2007-09-18 14:11:27 Re: Query works when kludged, but would prefer "best practice" solution