Re: pg_execute_from_file review - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: pg_execute_from_file review
Date
Msg-id AANLkTinEbRB3UbKmNc56vWXKmMva8y_2yFa+95M0Qp-D@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_execute_from_file review  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: pg_execute_from_file review
Re: pg_execute_from_file review
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> I'm not sure why you need either "from". It just seems like a noise
>> word. Maybe we could use pg_execute_query_file() and
>> pg_execute_query_string(), which would be fairly clear and nicely
>> symmetrical.
>
> +1, but I think "query" is also a noise word here.
> Why not just "pg_execute_file" and "pg_execute_string"?

I'd pick pg_execute_from_file() and just plain pg_execute(), myself.

pg_execute_file() could be read to mean you are going to execute the
file itself (i.e. it's a program).

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_execute_from_file review
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_execute_from_file review