* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Here's a small patch which greatly increases the speed of > >> pg_dump --column-inserts. > > > > The reason why no one's paid any attention to the speed of that code path > > is that if you care about dump/restore speed, you should be using the COPY > > code paths instead. Is it really worth adding code and complexity to > > pg_dump for this? > > One possible reason to care about this is if you're trying to move > data to another database. The INSERT format is more portable. > > Also, this isn't really adding any net code or complexity AFAICS.
Agreed- this looks more like a "gee, that makes a lot of sense" than a
"wow, that's way more complicated". Not a whole lot of point in
building up a known-to-be-constant string on every iteration of the
loop.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
