3 ms·
They think Postgres is cursed with a 2^16 limit; SQL Server has a parameter limit of ~2,000. I guess at least it's low enough that you're going to fail early.
by daemonologist 1y ago
They think Postgres is cursed with a 2^16 limit; SQL Server has a parameter limit of ~2,000. I guess at least it's low enough that you're going to fail early.
- thewisenerd 1y agoand then you write `.chunked(list)` so you can write `.map { query(list) }` instead of `.map { query(it) }` :) i wish there was an unused lambda parameter warning..
- kardianos 1y agoSure, but SQL Server DB protocol (TD) has a dedicated Bulk Insert specific for that functionality. TDS isn't perfect, but it is much better then the postgresql wire protocol v3. Sometime I want to build a DB front-end that you send up some type of iceberg/parquet or similar, and return a similar file format over a quic protocol. Like quic, persistent connections could be virtualized, and bulk insert could be sane and normalized: eg insert these rows into a table or temp table, then execute this script referencing it. While I'm at it, I'll normalize PL/SQL so even brain-dead back-ends (sqlite) could use procedural statements and in-database logic.