On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> * Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
>> Well, I guess the other option is to just add it to the format, full
>> stop. But as someone pointed out previously, that's not a terribly
>> scalable solution, but perhaps it could be judged adequate for this
>> particular case.
>
> Think I suggested that at one point. I'm all for doing that on a major
> version change like this one, but I think we already had some concerns
> about that on this thread (Andrew maybe?).
>
>> While I generally agree with the principal, I also wonder if it might
>> be better to just add this field in log_line_prefix and wait for
>> someone to complain about that as other than a theoretical matter.
>
> I might be working against myself, but I'll complain right now about the
> lack of any way to have a header on the CSV logs and that you don't get
> to control what fields are logged. That said, I'm not currently using
> them either, so my vote doesn't count for much. Of course, I'll also
> complain about the lack of any way to get PG to respect the header,
> forcing me to do fun things like:
>
> for file in *results*; do
> HEADER=`head -1 $file`
> sed -e 's:""::g' < $file | \
> psql -d beac -h sauron -c \
> "\copy my_table ($HEADER) from STDIN with csv header"
> done
>
> on a regular basis. How forcing me to do that rather than asking
> someone else to use 'tail -n +2' makes sense is beyond me..
It's not an either/or proposition. We could certainly support header
on/off/ignore, with the new extensible COPY syntax.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company