| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, PostgreSQL <Pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUGS] *.sql contrib files contain unresolvable MODULE_PATHNAME |
| Date: | 2011-10-12 15:32:03 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ1pW2Q4E44kGjEUJrMKNYc=aQO4oQGAOGPgrw8QH2MbQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Overengineering IMHO. Besides, if a psql poison comment like that
>>> exists, then we'd have to be careful not to emit one elsewhere. Think
>>> pg_dump, if someone puts that comment in a function body...
>>
>> Well, it can't be a comment, but what about a real psql command?
>> See my suggestion of using \echo.
>
> Frankly I think a comment is sufficient. We can make it more complicated
> later if people are still confused.
+1.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-10-12 15:40:32 | Re: [BUGS] *.sql contrib files contain unresolvable MODULE_PATHNAME |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2011-10-12 15:24:33 | Re: [BUGS] *.sql contrib files contain unresolvable MODULE_PATHNAME |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-10-12 15:40:32 | Re: [BUGS] *.sql contrib files contain unresolvable MODULE_PATHNAME |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-10-12 15:31:54 | Re: COUNT(*) and index-only scans |