Re: exposing COPY API
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: exposing COPY API |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4D52D2BF.1000908@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: exposing COPY API (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: exposing COPY API
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 02/09/2011 12:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Shigeru HANADA > <hanada@metrosystems.co.jp> wrote: >> On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 08:49:36 -0500 >> Robert Haas<robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 4:42 AM, Shigeru HANADA >>> <hanada@metrosystems.co.jp> wrote: >>>> I'll submit revised file_fdw patch after removing IsForeignTable() >>>> catalog lookup along Heikki's proposal. >>> So I'm a bit confused. I don't see the actual copy API change patch >>> anywhere here. Are we close to getting something committed there? >> I'm sorry but I might have missed your point... >> >> I replied here to answer to Itagaki-san's mention about typos in >> file_fdw patch. >> >> Or, would you mean that file_fdw should not depend on "copy API change" >> patch? > I mean that this thread is entitled "exposing copy API", and I'm > wondering when and if the patch to expose the COPY API is going to be > committed. Itagaki-san published a patch for this about about 12 hours ago in the file_fdw thread that looks pretty committable to me. This whole API thing is a breakout from file_fdw, because the original file_fdw submission copied huge chunks of copy.c instead of trying to leverage it. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: