public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Andrei M. Eichler <[email protected]>
To: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: COPY options
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 13:30:07 -0300
Message-ID: <CABS=F1+WaN1wXgDY1b+DMOTgGqgWjAoeMuZUiH5zOWVYO+A7gw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CABS=F1+aHKpE9Z2CwnffwCOxRKn9pFuYBsoAkHCL82YLm2q3eg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACjxUsM_4O40y_bMjh3UAMmY1q3dTqecJzqRBJFzp-wkZcYCGg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABS=F1+hjzqLgkx23p6RqPkyim_c2GOdMdsBZgGj27qAwwEyxw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACjxUsMcsVT3N_znoWem2BtFvHtKtnNFKcJauVT4krtpjujgAw@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-docs>

Thanks for the replies, I'm using postgres since 8.3 and didn't notice at
the time of 9.0 release the change in the syntax, as the old syntax still
works, every time I read the current documentation I didn't notice that I
was using it wrong.

I agree with Tom Lane about leaving it alone.

Another question, I don't know if I should ask it here, why FORCE_NOT_NULL
and FORCE_NULL doesn't allow * as list of columns as FORCE_QUOTE?

2016-04-29 13:03 GMT-03:00 Tom Lane <[email protected]>:

> Kevin Grittner <[email protected]> writes:
> > It's not really a question of whether we should go back to
> > documenting the deprecated syntax, but whether (and when) support
> > for it should finally be ripped out.  It was last documented in 8.4.
>
> We still document, and support, not only the pre-9.0 COPY syntax but
> also the pre-7.3 COPY syntax; see the bottom of the COPY reference page.
> The timescale for getting rid of that kind of thing is *really* long,
> in part for fear of breaking old pg_dump backups.
>
> BTW, so far as FORCE NULL goes, I think that feature was implemented
> earlier in the 9.0 cycle than where we put in the new generalized
> option syntax.  When we did the latter, we reverted the documentation
> of the old syntax to exactly match 8.4, but did not take out the
> gram.y production allowing the never-released FORCE NULL syntax.
> I do not recall if that was intentional or an oversight.
> We could (a) document it, (b) remove it, or (c) leave it alone.
> At this point I favor the benign neglect approach.
>
>                         regards, tom lane
>

view thread (7+ messages)

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: COPY options
  In-Reply-To: <CABS=F1+WaN1wXgDY1b+DMOTgGqgWjAoeMuZUiH5zOWVYO+A7gw@mail.gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox