From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
Cc: | 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 16:35:13 |
Message-ID: | 4A9E9EC1.5030303@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Sep 2, 2009, at 5:07 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>
>> One reason I don't like this proposal is that postgresql does not
>> preserve the original 'create view' statement for editing. The
>> resulting sql that is given to you to edit is hopelessly mangled and I
>> think it's not good to encourage people to modify views in this
>> fashion.
>>
>> Then again, we are only reproducing what pgadmin can already do, so
>> why not? :-)
>
> 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.
As discussed last week, the current viewdef pretty printing doesn't put
each target in the select list on it own line (or lines) - hence my
proposal to make it do so. I think this would be even more desirable if
we have \ev. Without that I think \ev is likely to be fairly useless.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-09-02 16:54:06 | Re: trigger SPI_exec count argument |
Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2009-09-02 16:24:45 | Re: Adding \ev view editor? |