Re: New 'pg' consolidated metacommand patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: New 'pg' consolidated metacommand patch
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwbpsKddGNf7J_bDHNd3cepv-YTPE=+xOd9-A+goYjaYxg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to New 'pg' consolidated metacommand patch  (Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: New 'pg' consolidated metacommand patch
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 4:19 PM Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
I'd also appreciate +1 and -1 votes on the overall idea, in case this entire feature, regardless of implementation, is simply something the community does not want.

-1, at least as part of core.  My question would be how much of this is would be needed if someone were to create an external project that installed a "pg" command on top of an existing PostgreSQL installation.  Or put differently, how many of the changes to the existing binaries are required versus nice-to-have?

David J.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Default gucs for EXPLAIN
Next
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Default gucs for EXPLAIN