From: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Artur Zakirov <zaartur(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: proposal - psql - possibility to redirect only tabular output |
Date: | 2021-03-03 16:58:02 |
Message-ID: | 84b16c87-f66a-b324-8abc-934a875b0dc0@pgmasters.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/3/20 11:27 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> pá 3. 7. 2020 v 12:16 odesílatel Artur Zakirov <zaartur(at)gmail(dot)com
> <mailto:zaartur(at)gmail(dot)com>> napsal:
>
> The patch looks interesting. As far as I understand the purpose of the
> patch is to hide status messages from result output.
> So maybe it would be enough just to hide status messages at all. There
> is the QUIET variable for that. The main advantage of this variable is
> that it hides a status of "\lo_" commands, for example, as well as a
> status of utility commands. So the QUIET variable covers more use
> cases already.
>
>
> The quiet mode isn't exactly what I want (it can be used as a workaround
> - and now, pspg https://github.com/okbob/pspg
> <https://github.com/okbob/pspg> knows a format of status line and can
> work it).
>
> I would like to see a status row. For me it is a visual check so some
> statements like INSERT or UPDATE was done successfully. But I would not
> send it to the terminal with an active tabular pager.
It's been quite a while since the patch has seen any review. It's not
clear that this is enough of an improvement over QUIET to be worthwhile.
I think it would be best to close this patch at the end of the CF if
there is no further reviewer/committer interest.
Regards,
--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2021-03-03 17:12:22 | Re: Confusing behavior of psql's \e |
Previous Message | David Steele | 2021-03-03 16:42:05 | Re: WIP: Aggregation push-down |