Re: Split copy.c

On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 at 07:35, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> On 2020-11-02 19:43:38 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > On 02/11/2020 19:23, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2020-11-02 11:03:29 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > > > There isn't much common code between COPY FROM and COPY TO, so I propose
> > > > that we split copy.c into two: copyfrom.c and copyto.c. See attached. I thin
> > > > that's much nicer.
> > >
> > > Not quite convinced that's the right split - or perhaps there's just
> > > more potential. My feeling is that splitting out all the DML related
> > > code would make the code considerably easier to read.
> >
> > What do you mean by DML related code?
>
> Basically all the insertion related code (e.g CopyMultiInsert*, lots of
> code in CopyFrom()) and perhaps also the type input invocations.

I quite like the fact that those are static and inline-able. I very
much imagine there'd be a performance hit if we moved them out to
another .c file and made them extern. Some of those functions can be
quite hot when copying into a partitioned table.

David