| From: | Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: bugfix: --echo-hidden is not supported by \sf statements |
| Date: | 2013-03-04 18:41:16 |
| Message-ID: | CAK3UJRF_Cb-WyvZmpCfCy4kS3gg7hx4w2rs_4svvaas09pE4qg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> Josh,
>
> * Josh Kupershmidt (schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
>> I still think this patch is an improvement over the status quo, and is
>> committable as-is. Yes, the patch doesn't address the existing
>> ugliness with minimal_error_message() and sidestepping PSQLexec(), but
>> at least it fixes the --echo-hidden behavior, and the various other
>> issues may be handled separately.
>
> Which patch, exactly, are you referring to wrt this..? I'm less than
> convinced that it's in a committable state, but I'd like to make sure
> that we're talking about the same thing here...
Sorry, this second version posted by Pavel:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFj8pRB3-Tov5s2dCGshp+Vedyk9s97d7hn7rDMmw9Ztrj-7tg@mail.gmail.com
Josh
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2013-03-04 18:53:06 | Re: Building on MinGW |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2013-03-04 18:39:18 | Re: bugfix: --echo-hidden is not supported by \sf statements |