Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> I dislike putting this into the backend precisely because it's trying to
>> impose a one-size-fits-all compression solution. Someone might wish to
>> use bzip2 instead of gzip, for instance, or tweak the compression level
>> options of gzip. It's trivial for the user to do that if the
>> compression program is separate, not trivial at all if it's wired into
>> COPY. Also, a pipe feature would have uses unrelated to compression,
>> such as on-the-fly analysis or generation of data.
> It seems that it would be better to have the options within pg_dump
> which would give the most flexibility.
What about all other client tools?
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.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2006-05-31 17:28:20|
|Subject: Re: Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe|
|Previous:||From: Martijn van Oosterhout||Date: 2006-05-31 17:24:59|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH] Magic block for modules|