Message-ID: <447DCFAF.4070308@commandprompt.com>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 10:17:35 -0700
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Organization: Command Prompt, Inc.
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060521)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
CC: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe
References: <12436.1149087794@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<447DB844.6010507@pse-consulting.de>
	<447DB910.2020607@pse-consulting.de>
	<13208.1149093007@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <13208.1149093007@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> 
> I dislike putting this into the backend precisely because it's trying to
> impose a one-size-fits-all compression solution.  Someone might wish to
> use bzip2 instead of gzip, for instance, or tweak the compression level
> options of gzip.  It's trivial for the user to do that if the
> compression program is separate, not trivial at all if it's wired into
> COPY.  Also, a pipe feature would have uses unrelated to compression,
> such as on-the-fly analysis or generation of data.

It seems that it would be better to have the options within pg_dump 
which would give the most flexibility.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

-- 

    === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
    Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
              http://www.commandprompt.com/