From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Zoltan Boszormenyi <zboszor(at)dunaweb(dot)hu> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Hans-Juergen Schoenig <hs(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, List pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] COPY view |
Date: | 2006-08-23 16:10:42 |
Message-ID: | 20060823161042.GS1963@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote:
> OK, here's my current version. The reference leak is fixed.
> But as my testcase shows, it only works for single selects
> currently. The parser accepts it but COPY doesn't produce
> the expected output. Please, suggest a solution.
I'm not sure I agree with the approach of creating a fake "SELECT * FROM
foo" in analyze.c in the relation case and passing it back to the parser
to create a Query node. That's not there in the original code and you
shouldn't need it. Just let the case where COPY gets a relation
continue to handle it as it does today, and add a separate case for the
SELECT.
That doesn't help you with the UNION stuff though.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zoltan Boszormenyi | 2006-08-23 16:15:04 | Re: [HACKERS] COPY view |
Previous Message | Zoltan Boszormenyi | 2006-08-23 15:53:26 | Re: [HACKERS] COPY view |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zoltan Boszormenyi | 2006-08-23 16:15:04 | Re: [HACKERS] COPY view |
Previous Message | Zoltan Boszormenyi | 2006-08-23 15:53:26 | Re: [HACKERS] COPY view |