Hmm, now that I look back at them I can't remember why I thought it is slower. Certainly using appendStringInfoCharMacro for every char is very slow, but I could probably use appendStringInfoString and it should be as fast as using the bytebuffer, they both do a straight forward memcpy.
Alon. On 6/25/05 4:27 PM, "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Alon Goldshuv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> A struct "bytebuffer" is used instead of a StringInfoData for storing the >> line and attributes. A StringInfoData is actually really cool and useful, >> but we don't really need it's formatting capabilities in COPY FROM (as far >> as I know), and so the bytebuffer is more straightfoward and faster. > > Is it really faster than appendStringInfoString or > appendBinaryStringInfo? > > regards, tom lane > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])