| From: | Dimitrios Apostolou <jimis(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: In-order pg_dump (or in-order COPY TO) |
| Date: | 2025-08-27 12:40:57 |
| Message-ID: | 6n801oq1-r471-0488-pn6s-8nn3o95o9r47@tzk.arg |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tuesday 2025-08-26 22:31, David G. Johnston wrote:
>The logical dump has no ordering - it will come out however it comes out. "COPY <table> TO ..." doesn't have an order by clause - there is no way to make or communicate to it that ordering is important. For adhoc work you can use "COPY <query> TO ..." and put and order by in the query.
Thank you, so it's not possible currently.
How would "COPY <query> TO" behave for copying very large tables?
Would it make sense to optionally have that in pg_dump?
Or would it make sense as a new feature, to optionally order "COPY
<table> TO ..." based on primary key where available, and use that in
pg_dump option?
Dimitris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitrios Apostolou | 2025-08-27 12:52:39 | Re: In-order pg_dump (or in-order COPY TO) |
| Previous Message | Dimitrios Apostolou | 2025-08-27 12:34:31 | Re: In-order pg_dump (or in-order COPY TO) |