Re: Proposal: new border setting in psql

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Asko Oja <ascoja(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Proposal: new border setting in psql
Date: 2008-08-23 18:42:57
Message-ID: 48B05A31.7010602@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 21:04:07 -0400
> "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> wrote:
>
>>> There's still the question of whether this covers any needs that aren't
>>> met just as well by XML or CSV output formats.
>>>
>> Well, we could remove all the display formats except XML. After all,
>> it can always be converted to any other format. Of course we wouldn't
>> do that. User convenience is all I'm thinking of.
>>
>
> Well, Tom has raised a question about its need and Asko has questioned
> whether it should be under a different setting but so far no one has
> outright rejected the proposal. Does anyone else have an opinion? I am
> attaching a patch for further review.
>
>

In general I think I prefer machine readable formats to be produces by
the backend so they are available through all clients, not just psql.

That said, this has sufficiently low impact that I'm not going to be
vastly upset if we let it through.

I think we should probably confine ourselves to output formats that are
in very wide use or we'll be supporting a vast multitude. CSV and XML
both qualify here - not sure that ReST does.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2008-08-23 18:52:16 Re: [GENERAL] Surprising syntax error
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-08-23 16:39:52 Re: Should enum GUCs be listed as such in config.sgml?