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 | 50A3EF63.3070405@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WIP patch: add (PRE|POST)PROCESSOR options to COPY (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: WIP patch: add (PRE|POST)PROCESSOR options to COPY
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/14/2012 02:05 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 11/14/12 11:50 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >>> COPY table FROM 'some command line |'; >>> COPY table TO '| some command line'; >>> >> >> I'd like to be able to filter STDIN if possible - with this syntax how >> is COPY going to know to hook up STDIN to the program? > Why don't you filter the data before it gets to stdin? Some program is > feeding the data to "stdin" on the client side. Why doesn't that do the > filtering? I don't see a large advantage in having the data be sent > unfiltered to the server and having the server do the filtering. Centralization of processing would be one obvious reason. I don't really see why the same reasoning doesn't apply on the backend. You could just preprocess the input before calling COPY (via a plperlu function for example). If we're going to have filtering functionality then it should be as general as possible, ISTM. But I seem to be alone in this, so I won't push it. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: