Tom Lane wrote:
>I'm also wondering why the backend need have anything at all to do with
>an improved function-definition mode. If you look in the archives you
>will see speculation about inventing psql backslash commands that would
>assist in entering raw function definitions by taking something you type
>and suitably quotifying it. This seems to me to be a cleaner and more
>localized approach to getting much the same functionality.
This would suit my needs, as I use psql to do my db setup. But it would
introduce a possible disconnect between psql and other interfaces, e.g.
pgadmin, wouldn't it? Might it not be better to do something that was at
least available to all clients, rather than make them all have to do
their own quote escaping?
Another thought: "create function foo() as stdin ..." reads a bit
strangely, to me. Perhaps "create function foo() from stdin ..." or
"create function foo() inline ..." might be better.
The thing that set me off on this track was that I was trying to analyse
a pure sql function's performance, so I was C&P'ing to and from my
definition file , and constantly having to escape/unescape quotes, and
it got damned annoying. I'm not dogmatic about how it is done, though,
merely keen to ensure *something* is done. If we are trying to impress
people with useability, this is one area where there's a gain to be
made, with luck at not much cost.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Kurt Roeckx||Date: 2003-08-31 18:15:43|
|Subject: Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)|
|Previous:||From: ohp||Date: 2003-08-31 14:36:52|
|Subject: pg_dump bug?|