On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:11:12AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On Thu, November 26, 2009 2:22 am, Jeff Davis wrote: > > On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 00:35 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >> On Wed, November 25, 2009 3:56 pm, Jeff Davis wrote: > >> > > >> > I worry that we're getting further away from the original problem. > >> Let's > >> > allow functions to get the bytes of data from a COPY, like the > >> original > >> > proposal. I am not sure COPY is the best mechanism to move records > >> > around when INSERT ... SELECT already does that. > >> > > >> > >> > >> I am not at all sure I think that's a good idea, though. We have > >> pg_read_file() for getting raw bytes from files. Building that into COPY > >> does not strike me as a good fit. > > > > I think we're in agreement. All I mean is that the second argument to > > COPY should produce/consume bytes and not records. I'm not discussing > > the internal implementation at all, only semantics. > > > > In other words, STDIN is not a source of records, it's a source of > > bytes; and likewise for STDOUT. > > Hmm. I can just imagine wanting to do that as a way of running COPY over > dblink. Are there other use cases?
It'd be nice to make this available to the next revision of DBI-Link and it'll be pretty handy for our SQL/MED whenever that happens. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers