Hi Andres,
Could you take a look at this? I think that you don't want
to touch the current text/csv/binary implementations. The
v17 patch approach doesn't touch the current text/csv/binary
implementations. What do you think about this approach?
Thanks,
--
kou
In <20240320.232732.488684985873786799.kou@clear-code.com>
"Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations" on Wed, 20 Mar 2024 23:27:32 +0900 (JST),
Sutou Kouhei <kou@clear-code.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could someone review the v17 patch to proceed this?
>
> The v17 patch:
>
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20240305.171808.667980402249336456.kou%40clear-code.com#d2ee079b75ebcf00c410300ecc4a357a
>
> Some profiles by Michael:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/ZelfYatRdVZN3FbE%40paquier.xyz#eccfd1a0131af93c48026d691cc247f4
>
> Thanks,
> --
> kou
>
> In <20240308.092254.359611633589181574.kou@clear-code.com>
> "Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations" on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 09:22:54 +0900
(JST),
> Sutou Kouhei <kou@clear-code.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In <ZelfYatRdVZN3FbE@paquier.xyz>
>> "Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations" on Thu, 7 Mar 2024 15:32:01 +0900,
>> Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>>
>>> While on it, here are some profiles based on HEAD and v17 with the
>>> previous tests (COPY TO /dev/null, COPY FROM data sent to the void).
>>>
>> ...
>>>
>>> So, in short, and that's not really a surprise, there is no effect
>>> once we use the dispatching with the routines only when a format would
>>> want to plug-in with the APIs, but a custom format would still have a
>>> penalty of a few percents for both if bottlenecked on CPU.
>>
>> Thanks for sharing these profiles!
>> I agree with you.
>>
>> This shows that the v17 approach doesn't affect the current
>> text/csv/binary implementations. (The v17 approach just adds
>> 2 new structs, Copy{From,To}Rountine, without changing the
>> current text/csv/binary implementations.)
>>
>> Can we push the v17 patch and proceed following
>> implementations? Could someone (especially a PostgreSQL
>> committer) take a look at this for double-check?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> kou
>>
>>
>
>
