Hi, On 2023-11-08 19:00:01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2023-11-08 13:18:39 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I think an actually usable feature of this sort would involve > >> copying all the failed lines to some alternate output medium, > >> perhaps a second table with a TEXT column to receive the original > >> data line. > > > If we go in that direction, we should make it possible to *not* use such a > > table as well, for some uses it'd be pointless. > > Why? You can always just drop the errors table if you don't want it.
I think it'll often just end up littering the database, particularly if the callers don't care about a few errors. > But I fail to see the use-case for ignoring errors altogether. My experience is that there's often a few errors due to bad encoding, missing escaping etc that you don't care sufficiently about when importing large quantities of data. Greetings, Andres Freund
