Re: psql --batch

From: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: psql --batch
Date: 2017-08-28 11:28:52
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.2.20.1708281319120.9003@lancre
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> I don't doubt about a sense of this configuration - but this specific
> combination depends on usage - so I don't think so using special option is
> good idea.

Although I agree with you that detailed settings are definitely debatable,
I'd say that at least it would be a more reasonable starting point for
scripting than the default configuration which is more interactive usage
oriented.

So even if unperfect, one is free to update defaults to suit more closely
their needs, eg "psql -B -F ':' ...", at least most of the scripting
conviniencies are already there.

I think that such a scripting mode should also imply --no-readline.

--
Fabien.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-08-28 11:39:36 Re: 1 test fails in make installcheck-world - database "regress_ecpg_user2" does not exist
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2017-08-28 11:14:54 Re: [BUGS] Bug in Physical Replication Slots (at least 9.5)?