Re: WIP patch: add (PRE|POST)PROCESSOR options to COPY

From: Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WIP patch: add (PRE|POST)PROCESSOR options to COPY
Date: 2012-09-18 07:07:05
Message-ID: 50581D99.3030101@ringerc.id.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 09/13/2012 10:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think it would be a lot better if this were designed so that the
> processor programs executed on client side. Which would probably make
> it not a COPY patch at all, but something in psql.

Either that, or allow the pre- and post- processors to be programs
written in a (possibly trusted) PL.

I can't say I really see the point though, when it's easy to just filter
the csv through a pipeline.

--
Craig Ringer

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian Schoppmann 2012-09-18 07:13:50 Invalid optimization of VOLATILE function in WHERE clause?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-09-18 03:10:26 Re: _FORTIFY_SOURCE by default?