Re: Concurrent psql patch - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Concurrent psql patch
Date
Msg-id 20669.1179096242@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Concurrent psql patch  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Concurrent psql patch
List pgsql-patches
Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> "David Fetter" <david@fetter.org> writes:
>> What's the reasoning behind \c&?  Does it "send things into the
>> background" the way & does in the shell?

> Sort of. It sends the *subsequent* command to the background...

That sounds just bizarre.  Existing backslash commands that do something
to a SQL command are typed *after* the command they affect (\g for
instance).  I don't think you should randomly change that.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Concurrent psql patch
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [DOCS] OS/X startup scripts