On Thursday 2005-09-22 13:16, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> >While I'm all for COPY from views, I think I'd rather have the syntactic
> >warts than code warts. ISTM that
> >
> >CREATE TEMP VIEW some_name AS SELECT * FROM table WHERE ...;
> >COPY some_name TO stdout;
> >
> >is much u
AgentM wrote:
> >
> > While I'm all for COPY from views, I think I'd rather have the
> > syntactic
> > warts than code warts. ISTM that
> >
> > CREATE TEMP VIEW some_name AS SELECT * FROM table WHERE ...;
> > COPY some_name TO stdout;
> >
> > is much uglier than
> >
> > COPY SELECT * FROM table W
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
So why not do what everyone is agreed on now?
I wasn't agreed on it ;-)
The primary objection I've got is that I think this will be a very
considerable increment of work for exactly zero increment in
functionality, compared
> From: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Also, as nifty as this might be, we should also be prepared
> for people
> to complain that it runs a lot slower than vanilla COPY, because it
> surely will.
At which point we point out to them that it's also much faster than any of the
other
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So why not do what everyone is agreed on now?
I wasn't agreed on it ;-)
The primary objection I've got is that I think this will be a very
considerable increment of work for exactly zero increment in
functionality, compared to being able to copy from a
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
While I'm all for COPY from views, I think I'd rather have the syntactic
warts than code warts. ISTM that
CREATE TEMP VIEW some_name AS SELECT * FROM table WHERE ...;
COPY some_name TO stdout;
is much uglier than
COPY SELECT * FROM table WHERE ... TO stdout;
They are
On N, 2005-09-22 at 21:34 +0200, Hans-Juergen Schoenig wrote:
> absolutely - the main advantage of the syntax tweak is that you can
> add parameters more easily.
Perhaps "COPY from SQL FUNCTIONS" is what wou need ?
Or should we piggypack on (future) work needed for hierarchical queries
and hav
While I'm all for COPY from views, I think I'd rather have the
syntactic
warts than code warts. ISTM that
CREATE TEMP VIEW some_name AS SELECT * FROM table WHERE ...;
COPY some_name TO stdout;
is much uglier than
COPY SELECT * FROM table WHERE ... TO stdout;
Or, you could just allow subqu
absolutely - the main advantage of the syntax tweak is that you can
add parameters more easily.
best regards,
hans
On 22 Sep 2005, at 21:25, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 11:31:42AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 11:31:42AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Paolo Magnoli wrote:
> >> Can't you just use a view?
>
> > no because a new is not a heap ...
>
> I think Paolo's idea is much better than munging the syntax of COP
On Wed, 2005-09-21 at 11:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Paolo Magnoli wrote:
> >> Can't you just use a view?
>
> > no because a new is not a heap ...
>
> I think Paolo's idea is much better than munging the syntax of COPY,
> th
Paolo Magnoli
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: R: [HACKERS] feature proposal ...
no because a new is not a heap ...
em=# create view x as select * from pg_class;
CREATE VIEW
em=# copy x to '/tmp/x';
ERROR: cannot copy from view "x&qu
Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote:
no because a new is not a heap ...
Why not use a function with a temporary table?
That way you can pass a table parameter that
is the temporary table with a select statement
that you can populate the temp table with.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
em=# create vie
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote:
no because a new is not a heap ...
Why not use a function with a temporary table?
That way you can pass a table parameter that
is the temporary table with a select statement
that you can populate the temp table with.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. D
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Paolo Magnoli wrote:
>> Can't you just use a view?
> no because a new is not a heap ...
I think Paolo's idea is much better than munging the syntax of COPY,
though. Fixing COPY so that you *could* copy from a view would provi
no because a new is not a heap ...
em=# create view x as select * from pg_class;
CREATE VIEW
em=# copy x to '/tmp/x';
ERROR: cannot copy from view "x"
best regards,
hans
Paolo Magnoli wrote:
Can't you just use a view?
-Messaggio originale-
Da: [EMAIL PROTE
Can't you just use a view?
-Messaggio originale-
Da: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] conto di Hans-Jürgen
Schönig
Inviato: mercoledì 21 settembre 2005 15.30
A: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oggetto: [HACKERS] feature proposal ...
hackers,
currently we have
17 matches
Mail list logo
