Re: Unexpectedly exposed COPY option: convert_selectively

From: KAZAR Ayoub <ma_kazar(at)esi(dot)dz>
To: Sugamoto Shinya <shinya34892(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Unexpectedly exposed COPY option: convert_selectively
Date: 2026-02-20 15:53:14
Message-ID: CA+K2RukpSoSXBOOxoQ9hOmKYx3_SeG2qyT4-qjbrt+z-Yspn=g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello,

On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 3:19 AM Sugamoto Shinya <shinya34892(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> My preference is Option 1, since it’s the simplest change and, as far
> as I know, there are no user-facing issues today. Option 2 would be a
> backward-incompatible change (even if undocumented). Option 3 would
> require additional work to make it a supported and documented feature,
> and I’m not aware of a clear demand/use case yet.

For option 3, i don't see a use case other than one would want to have a
different option of selectively picking input fields to map them to a
subset of table columns, this is far from being similar to
convert_selectively implementation (as the first is more complex), so
option 1 seems like it.

> Regards,
> Shinya Sugamoto

Regards,
Ayoub

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bertrand Drouvot 2026-02-20 15:55:27 Re: Flush some statistics within running transactions
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2026-02-20 15:51:03 Re: ecdh support causes unnecessary roundtrips