Re: "COPY foo FROM STDOUT" and ecpg
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: "COPY foo FROM STDOUT" and ecpg |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 512CE7DD.7030900@vmware.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: "COPY foo FROM STDOUT" and ecpg (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: "COPY foo FROM STDOUT" and ecpg
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 26.02.2013 18:40, Tom Lane wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas<hlinnakangas@vmware.com> writes: >> On 26.02.2013 18:23, Tom Lane wrote: >>> (I assume >>> the backend will bounce the other cases at some post-grammar stage.) > >> No. All four combinations of FROM/TO and STDIN/STDOUT are accepted: > > Huh. That seems like an odd decision. If we agree that that behavior > is desirable, then your patch is ok as-is, though I do question whether > this should be tested in the grammar at all rather than at runtime. > > I wonder whether this is just an oversight, or if we did it > intentionally because people were confused about which combinations > to use. It seems like maybe "TO STDIN" could be justified if you > thought about stdin of the recipient rather than stdout of the server, > but it still seems a bit sloppy thinking. Yeah, I'd guess that it was an oversight. But it goes back all the way to Postgres95, so it's a bit too late to change that. - Heikki
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: