Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [JDBC] Trouble with COPY IN

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>
Cc: James William Pye <lists(at)jwp(dot)name>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Matthew Wakeling <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Maciek Sakrejda <msakrejda(at)truviso(dot)com>, Samuel Gendler <sgendler(at)ideasculptor(dot)com>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [JDBC] Trouble with COPY IN
Date: 2010-09-18 20:15:45
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-jdbc
Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> writes:
>> On Fri, 6 Aug 2010, James William Pye wrote:
>>> I think there's a snag in the patch:

> Oh, duh.  It's a server side copy not going through the client at all. 
> Here's a hopefully final patch.

Applied with a correction: this would've totally broken binary copy in
old-style protocol, because there is no other EOF marker except the -1
in that case.

BTW, it strikes me that we could reduce the backwards-compatibility
impact of this patch if we made it ignore, rather than throw error for,
any extra data after the EOF marker.  I left it as-is since ISTM the
more error checking you can have in a binary data format, the better.
But a case could be made for doing the other thing, especially if
somebody wanted to argue for back-patching this.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2010-09-18 21:42:08
Subject: Re: Configuring synchronous replication
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-09-18 20:03:08
Subject: Re: patch: Add JSON datatype to PostgreSQL (GSoC, WIP)

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Lukas EderDate: 2010-09-19 13:16:57
Subject: java.sql.ResultSet.getTime() returns wrong time
Previous:From: Craig RingerDate: 2010-09-18 02:55:46
Subject: Re: Broken pipe error

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group