drizzle-discuss team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: about replacing loadfile with filesystem storage engine
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 21:50:22 +0800, ZQ <ziminq@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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...)
I think we need enclosed by and escaped by too (for the
filesystem_engine). But for starting with LOAD DATA INFILE, perhaps can
start out without this option.
so then both features are developed in parallel (the engine itself and
the code to make it work for LOAD DATA INFILE).
To do that, do the LAD DATA INFILE work in a different branch.