Re: SQL/MED - file_fdw
От | Itagaki Takahiro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SQL/MED - file_fdw |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTikjcnxq6XtinMPJY7-OuAgp=QZJvaJNjyXfH3mj@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SQL/MED - file_fdw ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:33, Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote: > Review for CF: Thank your for the review! > Since it doesn't appear to be intended to change any user-visible > behavior, I don't see any need for docs or changes to the regression > tests. There might be some user-visible behaviors in error messages because I rearranged some codes to check errors, But we can see the difference only if we have two or more errors in COPY commands. They should be not so serious issues. > So far everything I've done has been with asserts enabled, so I > haven't tried to get serious benchmarks, but it seems fast. I will > rebuild without asserts and do performance tests before I change the > status on the CF page. > > I'm wondering if it would make more sense to do the benchmarking with > just this patch or the full fdw patch set? Both? I tested the performance on my desktop PC, but I cannot see any differences. But welcome if any of you could test on high-performance servers. Comparison with file_fdw would be more interesting If they have similar performance, we could replace "COPY FROM" to "CREATE TABLE AS SELECT FROM foreign_table", that is more flexible. -- Itagaki Takahiro
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: