On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 05:08:54PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:09 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> >> On 03/05/2014 09:11 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >>> After testing this feature, I noticed that FORCE_NULL and
> >>> FORCE_NOT_NULL can both be specified with COPY on the same column.
> >
> >> Strictly they are not actually contradictory, since FORCE NULL relates
> >> to quoted null strings and FORCE NOT NULL relates to unquoted null
> >> strings. Arguably the docs are slightly loose on this point. Still,
> >> applying both FORCE NULL and FORCE NOT NULL to the same column would be
> >> rather perverse, since it would result in a quoted null string becoming
> >> null and an unquoted null string becoming not null.
> >
> > Given the remarkable lack of standardization of "CSV" output, who's
> > to say that there might not be data sources out there for which this
> > is the desired behavior? It's weird, I agree, but I think throwing
> > an error for the combination is not going to be helpful. It's not
> > like somebody might accidentally write both on the same column.
> >
> > +1 for clarifying the docs, though, more or less in the words you
> > used above.
> Following that, I have hacked the patch attached to update the docs
> with an additional regression test (actually replaces a test that was
> the same as the one before in copy2).
>
> I am attaching as well a second patch for file_fdw, to allow the use
> of force_null and force_not_null on the same column, to be consistent
> with COPY.
> Regards,
Correction, this is the patch applied, not the earlier version.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
