Re: COPY FROM WHEN condition
Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
From: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: surafel3000@gmail.com, berlin.ab@gmail.com, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-11-24T09:02:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 24 Nov 2018 at 02:09, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 11/23/18 12:14 PM, Surafel Temesgen wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 11:59 PM Tomas Vondra > > <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com <mailto:tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>> wrote: > > So, what about using FILTER here? We already use it for aggregates when > > filtering rows to process. > > > > i think its good idea and describe its purpose more. Attache is a > > patch that use FILTER instead > FWIW, I vote for just using WHERE here. Right now we have 2 syntaxes for filtering rows in queries, both of which use WHERE immediately before the condition: 1). SELECT ... FROM ... WHERE condition 2). SELECT agg_fn FILTER (WHERE condition) FROM ... I'm not a huge fan of (2), but that's the SQL standard, so we're stuck with it. There's a certain consistency in it's use of WHERE to introduce the condition, and preceding that with FILTER helps to distinguish it from any later WHERE clause. But what you'd be adding here would be a 3rd syntax 3). COPY ... FROM ... FILTER condition which IMO will just lead to confusion. Regards, Dean
Commits
-
Remove unused struct member, enforce multi_insert callback presence.
- 57a7a3adfe4e 12.0 landed
-
Separate per-batch and per-tuple memory contexts in COPY
- 36a1281f86c0 12.0 landed
-
Fix handling of volatile expressions in COPY FROM ... WHERE
- 4a8283d0ec5a 12.0 landed
-
Allow COPY FROM to filter data using WHERE conditions
- 31f3817402da 12.0 landed
-
Remove obsolete netbsd dynloader code
- b68ff3ea672c 12.0 cited