On 18/11/2020 08:21, Soumyadeep Chakraborty wrote:
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 2:38 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Fixed all the other things you listed, fixed a bug in setting
'file_encoding', and trimmed down the #includes.
Thanks! LGTM! Marking as Ready for Committer.
Pushed, thanks for the
Linnakangas wrote:
There isn't much common code between COPY FROM and COPY TO, so I propose
that we split copy.c into two: copyfrom.c and copyto.c. See attached. I thin
that's much nicer.
Not quite convinced that's the right split - or perhaps there's just
more potential. My feeling
3:29 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > > > > There isn't much common code between COPY FROM and COPY TO, so I
> > > > > propose
> > > > > that we split copy.c into two: copyfrom.c and copyto.c. See attached.
> > > > > I thin
> > > &g
Hey Heikki,
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 1:30 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Thanks for working on this refactor. LGTM! I had a few minor comments:
1. We should rename the CopyFormatOptions *cstate param in
ProcessCopyOptions() to CopyFormatOptions *options and List *options to
List *raw_options IMO,
On 2020-11-03 08:38, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
[v3-0001-Split-copy.c-into-copyto.c-and-copyfrom.c.patch]
[v3-0002-Split-copyfrom.c-further-into-copyfrom.c-and-copy.patch]
The patches apply ok, but I get these errors:
In file included from ../../../src/include/postgres.h:46
tween COPY FROM and COPY TO, so I propose
> > > > that we split copy.c into two: copyfrom.c and copyto.c. See attached. I
> > > > thin
> > > > that's much nicer.
> > >
> > > Not quite convinced that's the right split - or perhaps there's just
> >
On 2020-11-02 19:43:38 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 02/11/2020 19:23, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2020-11-02 11:03:29 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > > There isn't much common code between COPY FROM and COPY TO, so I propose
> > > that we split
On 02/11/2020 19:23, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2020-11-02 11:03:29 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
There isn't much common code between COPY FROM and COPY TO, so I propose
that we split copy.c into two: copyfrom.c and copyto.c. See attached. I thin
that's much nicer.
Not quite convinced that's
Hi,
On 2020-11-02 11:03:29 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> While looking at the parallel copy patches, it started to annoy me how large
> copy.c is.
Agreed.
> There isn't much common code between COPY FROM and COPY TO, so I propose
> that we split copy.c into two: copyfrom.c
rontend (2.0 protocol) */
COPY_NEW_FE, /* to frontend (3.0 protocol) */
} CopyDest;
Should we have one enum or both are required, if both are required we
could think of naming like COPY_TO_FILE, COPY_FROM_FILE, it will make
it more clearer.
There is one warning while applying the v2 patch:
in the past, but I haven't done anything about it.)
[0001-Split-copy.c-into-...o.c-and-copyfrom.c.patch]
There seems to be an oversight of contrib/file_fdw. (debian 10, gcc
8.3.0)
Ah yeah, I missed updating file_fdw. Here's a new patch.
Something still not quite right in the compile-with-assert
On 2020-11-02 10:03, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
While looking at the parallel copy patches, it started to annoy me how
large copy.c is. It confuses my little head. (Ok, it's annoyed me many
times in the past, but I haven't done anything about it.)
[0001-Split-copy.c-into-...o.c
12 matches
Mail list logo
