| From: | Daniel Farina <drfarina(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(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: | 2009-11-26 05:49:17 |
| Message-ID: | 7b97c5a40911252149mbd41c6btd82239bbf9ab0e96@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:35 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> On Wed, November 25, 2009 3:56 pm, Jeff Davis wrote:
>>
>> I worry that we're getting further away from the original problem. Let's
>> allow functions to get the bytes of data from a COPY, like the original
>> proposal. I am not sure COPY is the best mechanism to move records
>> around when INSERT ... SELECT already does that.
>>
>
>
> I am not at all sure I think that's a good idea, though. We have
> pg_read_file() for getting raw bytes from files. Building that into COPY
> does not strike me as a good fit.
I think we speak of the opposite direction...
fdr
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-11-26 06:30:14 | Re: Hot Standby and cancelling idle queries |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-11-26 05:35:42 | Re: [PATCH 4/4] Add tests to dblink covering use of COPY TO FUNCTION |