| From: | Daniel Farina <drfarina(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)krosing(dot)net>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Farina <dfarina(at)truviso(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 4/4] Add tests to dblink covering use of COPY TO FUNCTION |
| Date: | 2009-11-25 05:12:20 |
| Message-ID: | 7b97c5a40911242112l4c3f6f30m8c0458edd11a646a@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> It depends on design. I don't thing so internal is necessary. It is
> just wrong design.
Depends on how lean you want to be when doing large COPY...right now
the cost is restricted to having to call a function pointer and a few
branches. If you want to take SQL values, then the semantics of
function calling over a large number of rows is probably notably more
expensive, although I make no argument against the fact that the
non-INTERNAL version would give a lot more people more utility.
fdr
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2009-11-25 05:13:04 | Re: [PATCH 4/4] Add tests to dblink covering use of COPY TO FUNCTION |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2009-11-25 04:52:45 | Re: Syntax for partitioning |