Re: review: psql: edit function, show function commands patch

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>, Postgres - Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: review: psql: edit function, show function commands patch
Date: 2010-08-09 03:38:25
Message-ID: 7051.1281325105@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> What exactly is the point of the \sf command?

> I rather like \sf, actually; in fact, I think there's a decent
> argument to be made that it's more useful than the line-numbering
> stuff for \ef. I don't particularly like the name "\sf", but that's
> more because I think backslash commands are a fundamentally unscalable
> approach to providing administrative functionality than because I
> think there's a better option in this particular case. It's rather
> hard right now to get a function definition out of the database in
> easily cut-and-pastable format.

Um, but \sf *doesn't* give you anything that's usefully copy and
pasteable. And if that were the goal, why doesn't it have an option to
write to a file?

But it's really the line numbers shoved in front that I'm on about here.
I can't see *any* use for that behavior except to figure out what part of
your function an error message with line number is referring to; and as
I said upthread, there are better ways to be attacking that problem.
If you've got a thousand-line function (yes, they're out there) do you
really want to be scrolling through \sf output to find out what line 714
is?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jaime Casanova 2010-08-09 05:18:44 more personal copyrights
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-08-09 03:07:53 Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch