Thread: psql slash# command
Attached is the patch for the TODO item mentioned at http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-09/msg00352.php
The command has the following synopsis:
\#: displays the command history. Like \s but prefixes the lines with line numbers
\# <line_no>: executes the command(if any) executed at the line specified by line_no
regards,
--
Sibte Abbas
The command has the following synopsis:
\#: displays the command history. Like \s but prefixes the lines with line numbers
\# <line_no>: executes the command(if any) executed at the line specified by line_no
regards,
--
Sibte Abbas
Attachment
On 9/9/07, Sibte Abbas <sibtay@gmail.com> wrote: > Attached is the patch for the TODO item mentioned at > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-09/msg00352.php > > The command has the following synopsis: > > \#: displays the command history. Like \s but prefixes the lines with line > numbers > > \# <line_no>: executes the command(if any) executed at the line specified by > line_no > > regards, > -- > Sibte Abbas > > The attached patch adds the following new functionality: \#e <lineno>: Will open the command at the given lineno in an editor. \#e with no lineno will behave exactly like \e. Example: ===== psql> \# 199: create or replace function foo() returns integer as $$ begin return 10; end; $$language 'plpgsql'; 200: select version(); 201: select * from foo(); \# 200 <select version() is executed> psql> \#e 199 <the contents of lineno 199 are opened in the editor> Definitely not for 8.3, however I hope that it can be queued for 8.4. thanks, -- Sibte Abbas
Attachment
This has been saved for the 8.4 release: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sibte Abbas wrote: > On 9/9/07, Sibte Abbas <sibtay@gmail.com> wrote: > > Attached is the patch for the TODO item mentioned at > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-09/msg00352.php > > > > The command has the following synopsis: > > > > \#: displays the command history. Like \s but prefixes the lines with line > > numbers > > > > \# <line_no>: executes the command(if any) executed at the line specified by > > line_no > > > > regards, > > -- > > Sibte Abbas > > > > > > The attached patch adds the following new functionality: > > \#e <lineno>: Will open the command at the given lineno in an editor. > \#e with no lineno will behave exactly like \e. > > Example: > ===== > > psql> \# > > 199: create or replace function foo() returns integer as $$ > begin > return 10; > end; > $$language 'plpgsql'; > > 200: select version(); > > 201: select * from foo(); > > \# 200 > <select version() is executed> > > psql> \#e 199 > <the contents of lineno 199 are opened in the editor> > > Definitely not for 8.3, however I hope that it can be queued for 8.4. > > thanks, > -- > Sibte Abbas [ Attachment, skipping... ] > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
"Sibte Abbas" <sibtay@gmail.com> writes: > On 9/9/07, Sibte Abbas <sibtay@gmail.com> wrote: >> Attached is the patch for the TODO item mentioned at >> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-09/msg00352.php I looked this over and realized that it has little to do with the functionality that was so painfully hashed out in the original discussion thread here: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00207.php As I understood it, the consensus was: 1. Invent a switch (probably a variable instead of a dedicated \-command) that determines whether \s includes command numbers in its output. 2. Add "\# n" to re-execute command number n. You've twisted this around into >> \#: displays the command history. Like \s but prefixes the lines with line >> numbers >> >> \# <line_no>: executes the command(if any) executed at the line specified by >> line_no This is a serious regression in functionality from what was agreed to, because there is no possibility of shoehorning the equivalent of "\s file" into it --- you've already decided that any argument is a line number. It also seems to me to be pretty unintuitive and even dangerous that the same \-command would do *fundamentally* different things depending on whether it has an argument or not. Especially if one of those things involves executing an arbitrary SQL-command. > The attached patch adds the following new functionality: > \#e <lineno>: Will open the command at the given lineno in an editor. > \#e with no lineno will behave exactly like \e. None of that was anywhere in the original discussion; and what pray tell is the use of the second variant? I wonder whether it wouldn't be safer and more convenient if we defined '\# n' as pulling command n into the edit buffer, rather than immediately executing it. Actual execution is only a <return> away, but this definition would allow you to edit the command a bit more before you execute it --- including \e to use an editor. It also closes the loop in terms of providing some confidence that you typed the number you should have typed. BTW, not related to the original discussion, but I fail to understand how anyone finds \s useful interactively, when it doesn't paginate its output. Shouldn't we fix that? regards, tom lane
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
This patch implements the specification described here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00255.php
It made sense to assume anything following a \# to be a number, since "#" here denotes a number. However in order to prevent from bad input, there is a check in the get_hist_entry() function.
The above mentioned link contains definitions for both of these. Also the second variant here is just for completeness sake.
This makes more sense and also appears to be much safer. I will start modifying the patch as per this approach now.
regards,
-- Sibte Abbas
I looked this over and realized that it has little to do with the
functionality that was so painfully hashed out in the original
discussion thread here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00207.php
As I understood it, the consensus was:
1. Invent a switch (probably a variable instead of a dedicated \-command)
that determines whether \s includes command numbers in its output.
2. Add "\# n" to re-execute command number n.
You've twisted this around into
>> \#: displays the command history. Like \s but prefixes the lines with line
>> numbers
>>
>> \# <line_no>: executes the command(if any) executed at the line specified by
>> line_no
This patch implements the specification described here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00255.php
This is a serious regression in functionality from what was agreed to,
because there is no possibility of shoehorning the equivalent of "\s file"
into it --- you've already decided that any argument is a line number.
It made sense to assume anything following a \# to be a number, since "#" here denotes a number. However in order to prevent from bad input, there is a check in the get_hist_entry() function.
None of that was anywhere in the original discussion; and what pray
> The attached patch adds the following new functionality:
> \#e <lineno>: Will open the command at the given lineno in an editor.
> \#e with no lineno will behave exactly like \e.
tell is the use of the second variant?
The above mentioned link contains definitions for both of these. Also the second variant here is just for completeness sake.
I wonder whether it wouldn't be safer and more convenient if we defined
'\# n' as pulling command n into the edit buffer, rather than
immediately executing it. Actual execution is only a <return> away,
but this definition would allow you to edit the command a bit more
before you execute it --- including \e to use an editor. It also
closes the loop in terms of providing some confidence that you typed
the number you should have typed.
This makes more sense and also appears to be much safer. I will start modifying the patch as per this approach now.
regards,
-- Sibte Abbas
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Sibte Abbas <sibtay@gmail.com> wrote:
Based on your feedback I have modified the attached patch as follows:
1) \# n opens command n into the edit buffer.
2) A new psql variable; SHOW_LINE_NO is added, which is consulted by the \s command.
If it is set, \s prefixs each line of its output with an incrementing line number.
regards,
-- Sibte Abbas
This makes more sense and also appears to be much safer. I will start modifying the patch as per this approach now.
I wonder whether it wouldn't be safer and more convenient if we defined
'\# n' as pulling command n into the edit buffer, rather than
immediately executing it. Actual execution is only a <return> away,
but this definition would allow you to edit the command a bit more
before you execute it --- including \e to use an editor. It also
closes the loop in terms of providing some confidence that you typed
the number you should have typed.
Based on your feedback I have modified the attached patch as follows:
1) \# n opens command n into the edit buffer.
2) A new psql variable; SHOW_LINE_NO is added, which is consulted by the \s command.
If it is set, \s prefixs each line of its output with an incrementing line number.
regards,
-- Sibte Abbas