Re: [PATCH] Make "psql -1 < file.sql" work as with "-f"

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make "psql -1 < file.sql" work as with "-f"
Date: 2012-08-09 13:08:43
Message-ID: CA+TgmoY1fsDq8X__ucuhuGhxT826+Yj2QN5OaVf0yMgFHZ5wZw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 6:50 PM, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
>> I'm wondering if perhaps -- in addition to what you've done here -- we
>> should make "psql -1" error out if reading from a terminal.
>
> +1 for this.

OK, done.

I had to revise the original patch pretty heavily before committing;
the original patch assumed that it was OK to make psql -1 <file go
through process_file() while having psql -1 <file still go through
MainLoop() directly. This isn't a good idea, because that means that
any other behavioral differences between process_file() and MainLoop()
will be contingent on whether -1 is used, which is not what we want.
And there is at least one such difference that matters: whether or not
the file and line number get prepended when emitting error messages.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2012-08-09 13:09:21 Re: [WIP] Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2012-08-09 12:56:04 Re: [WIP] Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation