On Fri, Nov 8, 2024, at 08:42, Joel Jacobson wrote:
>> I’d be concerned choosing “single” given this future possibility. I do
>> agree that such an enhancement would be best done in its own patch.
>
> OK, sounds good to do it in its own patch.
>
> If the name "single" doesn't work for this reason, I see at least
> two alternatives:
>
> 1) Keep "single" as format name, and let it only be concerned about line by
> line
> processing, and introduce a different format for entire file processing,
> in its own patch.
>
> 2) Some other format name ("raw"?) that allows such future enhancement to
> be done within the same format, in its own patch.
>
> Other ideas?
Sorry for noise, "raw" is of course not an option given how v18 works,
due to the auto-magic EOL detection, same as in "text" and "csv",
as pointed out by others earlier in the thread.
How about "single_column"?
Then, a future patch could implement a "single_value" format,
to process an entire file or value. Such format could then also
support binary data, by detecting if the column type is "bytea".
/Joel
