| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Automatic transactions in psql |
| Date: | 2002-02-22 16:12:56 |
| Message-ID: | 200202221612.g1MGCv112712@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > This is an interesting idea, although you may want to give the user the
> > option to customize his prompt.
>
> Seems cool. I am a bit worried about whether the transaction-block
> detection mechanism is reliable, though. We might need to add something
> to the FE/BE protocol to make this work correctly.
OK, status on this? Seems we can't apply the patch as-is because of
reliability of the status display. Do people wnat a TODO item? I don't
think I want to make an incompatible protocol change for this feature.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-02-22 16:14:24 | Re: point in time recovery and moving datafiles online |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-02-22 16:09:48 | Re: [PATCHES] Automatic transactions in psql |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-02-22 16:17:25 | Re: Automatic transactions in psql |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-02-22 16:09:48 | Re: [PATCHES] Automatic transactions in psql |