Hi,
On 2023-11-08 19:00:01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> > On 2023-11-08 13:18:39 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I think an actually usable feature of this sort would involve
> >> copying all the failed lines to some alternate output medium,
> >> perhaps a second table with a TEXT column to receive the original
> >> data line.
>
> > If we go in that direction, we should make it possible to *not* use such a
> > table as well, for some uses it'd be pointless.
>
> Why? You can always just drop the errors table if you don't want it.
I think it'll often just end up littering the database, particularly if the
callers don't care about a few errors.
> But I fail to see the use-case for ignoring errors altogether.
My experience is that there's often a few errors due to bad encoding, missing
escaping etc that you don't care sufficiently about when importing large
quantities of data.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
