| From: | Lee Kindness <lkindness(at)csl(dot)co(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Lee Kindness <lkindness(at)csl(dot)co(dot)uk>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Jim Buttafuoco <jim(at)buttafuoco(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bulkloading using COPY - ignore duplicates? |
| Date: | 2001-12-18 16:04:13 |
| Message-ID: | 15391.26877.931767.773950@elsick.csl.co.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane writes:
> Lee Kindness <lkindness(at)csl(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > In an ideal world 'COPY FROM' would only be used with data output by
> > 'COPY TO' and it would be nice and sanitised. However in some fields
> > this often is not a possibility due to performance constraints!
> Of course, the more bells and whistles we add to COPY, the slower it
> will get, which rather defeats the purpose no?
Indeed, but as I've mentioned in this thread in the past, the code
path for COPY FROM already does a check against the unique index (if
there is one) but bombs-out rather than handling it...
It wouldn't add any execution time if there were no duplicates in the
input!
regards, Lee.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Don Baccus | 2001-12-18 16:14:57 | Re: Connection Pooling, a year later |
| Previous Message | Giuseppe Tanzilli - CSF | 2001-12-18 15:59:33 | RFC: Locale support for Numeric datatype |