Re: Fwd: psql include file using relative path

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fwd: psql include file using relative path
Date: 2011-03-10 00:32:30
Message-ID: 20110310003230.GB16733@fetter.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 07:05:19PM -0500, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> Good question, I hadn't thought of that either, and thinking about
> it a bit I think we'd want to keep the current behaviour of \i and
> provide new behaviour using a new command.
>
> Say when we are processing a pretty nested file after multiple \ir
> commands, a \i <relative path file> in any of those files should
> look for that file in psql's CWD/PWD. That is what the user expects
> from \i command currently and I don't think it'd be desirable to
> break that assumption.

I'm not sure I understand. Stuff that worked before would still work.

Should stuff break when it has a legitimately accessible path in it
just because that path is relative?

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2011-03-10 00:50:37 Re: Fwd: index corruption in PG 8.3.13
Previous Message Nikhil Sontakke 2011-03-10 00:24:30 Re: Fwd: index corruption in PG 8.3.13