| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Adding \ev view editor? |
| Date: | 2009-09-02 17:13:28 |
| Message-ID: | 10662.1251911608@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> David E. Wheeler wrote:
>> Is there any reason that the CREATE VIEW output to pg_dump and,
>> presumably, \ev, couldn't be refactored to pretty-print the VIEW
>> declaration?
> Tom just said a day or two ago that he doesn't want pg_dump using any
> pretty printing, and I think there is some sense in that.
It might be worth pointing out that what I don't want pg_dump doing
is suppressing "useless" parentheses. Adding whitespace ought to be
safe enough. So if anyone wanted to do the work of decoupling those
two effects of the prettyprint option, we could have "semi pretty
printed" output in pg_dump. Dunno if it's worth it.
I don't see any particular reason to say that \ev shouldn't use fully
pretty printed output, though. It doesn't have the same sorts of
future-proofing worries that pg_dump does.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2009-09-02 17:24:21 | Re: pgsql: Derived files that are shipped in the distribution used to be |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-09-02 16:54:06 | Re: trigger SPI_exec count argument |