"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 6:27 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> 1. Are we limiting the separator to be a single-byte character or not?
> I agree with what others have said that expanding functionality in
> this direction is more likely to mask errors than be useful.
OK, reasonable arguments were made why not to allow multi-character
separators. Should we then match the server and insist on a single-byte
separator? It's a bit inconsistent if psql can be made to emit "csv"
files that COPY can't read, especially when it's otherwise a subset
of what COPY allows.
>> 2. Speaking of the field separator, I'm pretty desperately unhappy
>> with the choice of "fieldsep_csv" as the parameter name.[...]
>> We could avoid this self-inflicted confusion by choosing a different
>> parameter name. I'd be good with "csv_fieldsep" or "csvfieldsep".
> Make sense to me - with the underscore personally.
Barring complaints, I'll switch it to "csv_fieldsep".
regards, tom lane