Re: file_fdw vs relative paths
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: file_fdw vs relative paths |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20200825002612.GB24071@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | file_fdw vs relative paths (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: file_fdw vs relative paths
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 01:22:21PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > According to the documentation, the filename given in file_fdw must be an > absolute path. Hwever, it works perfectly fine with a relative path. > > So either the documentation is wrong, or the code is wrong. It behaves the same > at least back to 9.5, I did not try it further back than that. Yes, I tested back to 9.5 too: CREATE EXTENSION file_fdw; CREATE SERVER pgconf FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER file_fdw; CREATE FOREIGN TABLE pgconf (line TEXT) SERVER pgconf OPTIONS ( filename 'postgresql.conf', format 'text', delimiter E'\x7f' ); SELECT * FROM pgconf; # ----------------------------- # PostgreSQL configuration file # ----------------------------- # # This file consists of lines of the form: ... > I can't find a reference to the code that limits this. AFAICT the documentation > has been there since day 1. > > Question is, which one is right. Is there a reason we'd want to restrict it to > absolute pathnames? I think it should work just like COPY, which allows relative paths; doc patch attached. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: