Re: very long record lines in expanded psql output - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Platon Pronko
Subject Re: very long record lines in expanded psql output
Date
Msg-id bb82e090-2587-5a64-003e-7203db5730fd@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: very long record lines in expanded psql output  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: very long record lines in expanded psql output  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi!

> a) with line cursor

Tried in different configurations, seems that line cursor works fine.

> b) format detection - I try to detect the header line - and I expect this
> line has the most length of all lines. I use a line with the same length as
> the column's type info (data, border).

I looked at pspg source, and here's what I found (please correct me if some/all
of my assumptions are wrong):

1. Input handling and format detection happens in table.c readfile().

2. There's some variables in DataDesc - maxx and maxbytes - that store the
longest line seen so far. But they are re-updated on each new row, so the fact
that header is shorter shouldn't affect them.

3. Expanded header detection is handled by is_expanded_header function. It has
ei_minx and ei_maxx return pointers, but when it is used from readfile() these
pointers are set to NULL in both cases - so header length is simply ignored.

> Did you test the wrapped format? It is working
> 
> \pset format wrapped
> \x
> select  * from pg_class;

There's no difference in outputs in wrapped format, so pspg behavior is also unaffected.

By the way, it seems that pspg recommends setting \pset border 2 anyway, so in vast
majority of cases there should be no possibility of difference at all - proposed patch
doesn't change output for \pset border 2 (because there's no sane way of making it
look okay in presence of long fields anyway).

Best regards,
Platon Pronko



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Lowering the ever-growing heap->pd_lower
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Another regexp performance improvement: skip useless paren-captures