Re: Concurrent psql patch - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From David Fetter
Subject Re: Concurrent psql patch
Date
Msg-id 20070513170042.GA14860@fetter.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Concurrent psql patch  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Concurrent psql patch  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-patches
On Sun, May 13, 2007 at 02:39:45PM +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Jim Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org> writes:
>
> > I don't see how we could make the names shorter without moving
> > away from a backslash command (which I'm guessing would be
> > painful).
> >
> > Assuming we're stuck with a backslash command \cs[witch] and \cn
> > [owait] seem to be about as good as we could get.
>
> I don't have \cs or \cn set up as abbreviations.
>
> I was originally thinking \c1, \c2, ... for \cswitch and \c& for
> \cnowait. I'm not sure if going for cryptic short commands is better
> or worse here.

+1 for \c1, \c2, etc.

What's the reasoning behind \c&?  Does it "send things into the
background" the way & does in the shell?

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778        AIM: dfetter666
                              Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to PostgreSQL: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Automatic adjustment of bgwriter_lru_maxpages
Next
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Automatic adjustment of bgwriter_lru_maxpages