Re: Doc patch on psql output formats

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Daniel Verite" <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Doc patch on psql output formats
Date: 2018-11-26 14:39:50
Message-ID: 4861.1543243190@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Daniel Verite" <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> As of HEAD, it's impossible to select latex output format
>> at all:
>> regression=# \pset format latex
>> \pset: ambiguous abbreviation "latex" matches both "latex" and
>> "latex-longtable"

> Oops!

>> We could fix that by adding a special case to accept an exact match
>> immediately.

> Personally I would favor that one, but to me the problem is that
> allowing abbreviations doesn't really work well in the long run,
> that is, if new format names are going to appear recurringly in the
> future.

Perhaps, but that ship sailed years ago. I do not think we can or
should remove the ability to write abbreviations here. People
writing scripts are obviously taking a risk of future breakage
if they abbreviate, but how is it an improvement in their lives
if we change the risk from "uncertain" to "100%"?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Steele 2018-11-26 14:45:49 Re: Updated backup APIs for non-exclusive backups
Previous Message Surafel Temesgen 2018-11-26 13:25:41 Re: COPY FROM WHEN condition