drizzle-discuss team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: about replacing loadfile with filesystem storage engine
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 5:05 AM, Stewart Smith <stewart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 23:39:42 +0800, ZQ <ziminq@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > You once mentioned one thing I can do is to replace load file with this
> > file system storage engine,
> > do you mean I should abstract some general code from my storage engine
> > plug it into load file code path?
> > I would like to know what's the potential problem with the original load
> > file functionality?
> following the existing code to do LOAD DATA INFILE shouldn't be *too*
> hard, and some can probably be pretty easily reused.
Then I'm afraid some of the code in filesystem storage will be moved to the
kernel in drizzle.
Finishing the basics of LOAD DATA INFILE is not hard, but to accomplish all
the requirements is a little tricky especially for these
ENCLOSING/ESCAPED_BY (I have a hard time to figure them out...)