Re: proposal: psql command \graw

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal: psql command \graw
Date: 2017-11-09 18:33:11
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: pgsql-hackers


2017-08-24 5:50 GMT+02:00 Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>:

> Hello Pavel,
> I have added the patch to the next commitfest.
> Patch applies, compiles, works.
> I'm okay with the names graw/graw+, and for having such short-hands.
> Missing break in switch, even if last item and useless, because other
> items do it... Also should be added at its place in alphabetical order?
> "column_header" is somehow redundant with "tuples_only". Use the
> existing one instead of adding a new one?
> More generally, ISTM that the same effect could be achieved without
> adding a new print function, but by setting more options (separator,
> ...) and calling an existing print function. If so, I think it would
> reduce the code size.
> Missing help entry.
> Missing non regression tests.
> Missing documentation.
I hope so I fixed all mentioned issues.



> --
> Fabien.

Attachment Content-Type Size
psql-graw-2.patch text/x-patch 7.3 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2017-11-09 18:35:09 Re: [POC] Faster processing at Gather node
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2017-11-09 18:16:04 Re: Simplify ACL handling for large objects and removal of superuser() checks