← Back to team overview

drizzle-discuss team mailing list archive

Re: about replacing loadfile with filesystem storage engine


On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 6:50 AM, ZQ <ziminq@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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
>> > my
>> > file system storage engine,
>> > do you mean I should abstract some general code from my storage engine
>> > and
>> > 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...)
> --Zimin

Does Drizzle need all the featues of LOAD DATA INFILE? COPY in pg is
much more basic and works fine...

Rob Wultsch

Follow ups