On Jan 29, 2009, at 9:43 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 05:18:19PM +0000, Gregory Stark wrote:
>> David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
>>> * No built-in ways to get the information psql gets. "See what
>>> psql is doing" isn't an option when somebody doesn't have psql on
>> Uhm, what information are you referring to here?
> All the stuff that generates \d output is available only to psql.
> When somebody wants to make another client, or even expose some of
> that functionality, they pretty much have to roll it from scratch.
I'd say a good example close of this is the ability to generate full
create statements for database objects via an SQL command. I.e.
shelling out to pg_dump is not always a fun option.
Erik Jones, Database Administrator
Support, Scalability, Reliability
866.518.9273 x 260
In response to
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-01-30 00:54:28|
|Subject: Re: Full backup - pg_dumpall sufficient? |
|Previous:||From: Greg Smith||Date: 2009-01-29 23:37:57|
|Subject: Re: Pet Peeves?|