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

Re: ERROR: relation . . . does not exist

From: "Albretch Mueller" <lbrtchx(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ERROR: relation . . . does not exist
Date: 2008-08-30 12:23:25
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-general
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 7:50 PM, Adrian Klaver <aklaver(at)comcast(dot)net> wrote:
> Define easily.
 OK, let me try to outline the approach I would go for:
 I think "COPY FROM CSV" should have three options, namely:
 1) the way we have used it in which you create the table first
 2) another way in which defaults are declared, generally as:
 2.1) aggressive: data type, value and formatting analysis is done; if
only 1 or 0 are found declare then a BOOLEAN, if repeated data is
found (say state codes) and the stratification nodes cover the rest of
the data, stratify the data out to other extra table (they have a name
I can't recall now), index it ..., if data is kind of numeric with
front slashes and/or hyphen could they possibly be dates? if they are
definitelly dates convert them to bigint (and do the formatting in the
presentation code (also this a win-win situation with i18n code)) ...
 2.2) conservative: data type and value, but no formatting analysis is
done and the greater encompassing data type is selected, say for 1 or
0 data use bytes [0, 255], for bytes use int, if something could be
encoded as char(2), use varchar instead, . . .
 2.3) dumn: just use the coarsest data type possible; bigint for
anything that looks like a number and varchar for the rest
 the "dumn" option should suggest to the DBA the option they are
using, quantified consequences for their desicions (larger DBs for no
reason, approx. reduction in speed, . .) and how not to be "dumn"
 3) or you could define "import templates" declaring which specific
data types to use for data in a certain way, which could be declared
per column using regexps
> I could go on, but the point is that table data types require some thought on the part of the DBA.
 Well, it still requires their minds and input, but they will have
jobs even if they get some help, don't you think so ;-)

In response to


pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2008-08-30 12:53:52
Subject: Re: ERROR: relation . . . does not exist
Previous:From: Albretch MuellerDate: 2008-08-30 11:47:28
Subject: DUPS in tables columns ERROR: column ". . . " does not exist

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