| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: proposal or just idea for psql - show first N rows from relation backslash statement |
| Date: | 2013-02-13 23:44:23 |
| Message-ID: | 19631.1360799063@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2013/2/14 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>> Can't you pretty much do this already in psql with FETCH_COUNT? I see
>> no good reason to invent more SQL syntax.
> Doesn't that just split up the retrieval of the result set into blocks of
> FETCH_COUNT rows, i.e. does not limit the result set?
Well, you'll get a page worth of data before your pager blocks it,
and then you can continue, or not, for relatively little cost.
I can't see that fetching a fixed number of rows is more useful
than that.
[ experiments... ] Although I notice that psql's FETCH_COUNT logic
doesn't realize that it could be applied to a "TABLE foo" query.
That seems like it might be worth fixing.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabrízio de Royes Mello | 2013-02-14 00:16:21 | Re: proposal or just idea for psql - show first N rows from relation backslash statement |
| Previous Message | Ian Lawrence Barwick | 2013-02-13 23:34:42 | Re: proposal or just idea for psql - show first N rows from relation backslash statement |