From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Csaba Nagy" <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>, "Shane Ambler" <pgsql(at)Sheeky(dot)Biz>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Concurrent psql API |
Date: | 2008-04-10 17:04:17 |
Message-ID: | 3332.1207847057@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> "Csaba Nagy" <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com> writes:
>> For interactive use in the above mentioned scenario you can use the
>> 'screen' command and start as many psqls as needed
> Sure, or you could just start multiple xterms or emacs shell buffers
> (my preferred setup).
Yeah, that's an awfully good point, and I have to admit I'd generally
prefer multiple xterms too.
> But I'm sure there are people who would prefer C-z too.
AFAICT, supporting C-z will add a pretty significant increment of
definitional complexity, implementation complexity, and portability
risks to what otherwise could be a relatively small patch. I don't
want to buy into that just because "some people might use it".
I note also that if we start trapping C-z, it would stop working
for what it works for now, namely suspending psql so you can do
something else in that window.
So, +1 for thinking about this entirely as a scripting feature.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Chernow | 2008-04-10 17:06:43 | Re: [PATCHES] libpq type system 0.9a |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-04-10 16:58:17 | Re: [PATCHES] libpq type system 0.9a |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Chernow | 2008-04-10 17:06:43 | Re: [PATCHES] libpq type system 0.9a |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-04-10 17:00:10 | Re: Fix for win32 stat() problems |