On Fri, 2005-06-24 at 00:52, 李江华 wrote:
> David Bear:
>
> Yes. I agree with you.
> \copy is really too brittle.
> I wonder why \copy is not like oracle's sqlldr?
> I think sqlldr is more powerful. When using sqlldr,we can specify the
> maximum error records we allow,and we can also specify the number we should
> commit in every transaction.
While I wouldn't mind have the versatility of sqlldr, I would HATE to
have to deal with such a clunky interface. The only features of sqlldr
I actually like are the ones that allow rejected records to go into a
separate file.
But like most of oracle's tools, it's awkward to use, and requires a lot
of up front work even if you only want a simple load. Sure, add some
features to \copy, but don't emulate the WAY those features are
implemented oracle.
> Another aspect is also important. Oracle has better partition table
> facilities,it's especially suitable for large tables,as well as index
> partition concepts.But PostgreSQL has no such concepts.These are really
> important for large database.
No one would complain if someone stepped up and programmed a decent
table partitioning patch. I have a feeling it's one of the things on
the TODO list that will happen in the next version or two.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
