Re: COPY enhancements

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>   
>> Right. What I proposed would not have been terribly invasive or 
>> difficult, certainly less so than what seems to be our direction by an 
>> order of magnitude at least. I don't for a moment accept the assertion 
>> that we can get a general solution for the same effort.
>>     
>
> And at the same time, Greg's list of minimum requirements was far
> longer than what you proposed to do.  We can *not* just implement
> those things one at a time with no thought towards what the full
> solution looks like --- at least not if we want the end result to
> look like it was intelligently designed, not merely accreted.
>
>             
>   

I don't disagree with that.

At the same time, I think it's probably not a good thing that users who 
deal with very large amounts of data would be forced off the COPY fast 
path by a need for something like input support for non-rectangular 
data. It probably won't affect my clients too much in this instance, but 
then their largest loads are usually of the order of only 50,000 records 
or so. I understand Truviso has handled this by a patch that does the 
sort of stuff Greg was talking about.

cheers

andrew