Re: WIP patch: add (PRE|POST)PROCESSOR options to COPY
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WIP patch: add (PRE|POST)PROCESSOR options to COPY |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 50A3C7BA.7030000@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WIP patch: add (PRE|POST)PROCESSOR options to COPY (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: WIP patch: add (PRE|POST)PROCESSOR options to COPY
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/14/2012 11:20 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > I disagree with Simon's objection also, because neither reading from > nor writing to an external program is likely to fit the model of > reading/updating a table very well. For instance, there's no good > reason to suppose that reading twice will give the same results. So > force-fitting this usage into the FDW model is not going to work well. > > Nor do I really see the argument why a "pipe_fdw" module is cleaner > than a "COPY TO/FROM pipe" feature. > > Yeah, I agree, although the syntax looks a bit unclean. Maybe something like COPY foo FROM wherever WITH (FILTER '/path/to/program') might work better. You'd hook up the source to the filter as its stdin and read its stdout. Not sure what we'd do for \copy though. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: