Dawid Kuroczko escribió:
> Hmm, seems doable.
I think that the followup discussion leads to implementing just \G (and
\x auto).
> I think there should be a format Enum, which would take values like NORMAL,
> EXTENDED, and EXTENDED_ONCE -- but this would be a much more invasive patch.
> Oh, and coincidentally its where AUTO format should go. :)
If the code ends up better with a more invasive patch, by all means do
that.
> 3. We should decide how each of the "commands" work in auto mode.
> I think it should be something like: "if output is less or equal than
> screen width -- use normal mode, else extended". I we have \g and \G,
> they should be handled a bit differently in auto mode:
> ";" -- perform automatic format adjustment
> "\g" -- force normal mode (probably for file-output)
> "\G" -- force extended mode (probably for file-output).
> I especially would like an opinion on this from you.
Sounds good -- in auto mode, you can override it if you want (unless it
is one backslash command, but I don't think that's a problem)
> 4. And as for using "\x" for the one-shot expanded output, I think it would
> be possible to allow queries like:
> SELECT * FROM foo\x
> ...but I think fundamental problem with this approach is that it promotes
> "\x" to be able to submit query. I don't think its a good idea.
No, I don't think this is a good idea either. Let's just not implement
\x.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
