| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hans-Juergen Schoenig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Zoltan Boszormenyi <zboszor(at)dunaweb(dot)hu>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Performance testing of COPY (SELECT) TO |
| Date: | 2006-08-28 16:55:28 |
| Message-ID: | 20060828165528.GR27526@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Hans-Juergen Schoenig wrote:
> >It's ugly because you are forcing the system to parse something that
> >was already parsed.
>
> definitely an argument for dropping the view stuff ...
On the other hand, it's quite possible that this could be made to work
_without_ doing black magic (which would be OK by me).
> >On the other hand I don't see why you are arguing in favor of a useless
> >feature whose coding is dubious; you can have _the same thing_ with nice
> >code and no discussion.
>
> what are you referring to?
The fact that the direct "copy view" feature is just syntactic sugar
over "copy (select * from view)". The latter we can have without
discussion -- from me, that is :-)
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-08-28 17:00:13 | Re: [HACKERS] Performance testing of COPY (SELECT) TO |
| Previous Message | Zoltan Boszormenyi | 2006-08-28 16:54:37 | Re: [HACKERS] Performance testing of COPY (SELECT) TO |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-08-28 17:00:13 | Re: [HACKERS] Performance testing of COPY (SELECT) TO |
| Previous Message | Zoltan Boszormenyi | 2006-08-28 16:54:37 | Re: [HACKERS] Performance testing of COPY (SELECT) TO |