| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Allowing line-continuation in pgbench custom scripts |
| Date: | 2014-05-26 18:15:26 |
| Message-ID: | 1159.1401128126@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Monday, May 26, 2014, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> This seems pretty likely to break existing scripts that happen to contain
>> backslashes. Is it really worth the compatibility risk?
> Do you mean due to the bugs you point out, or in general? Is it really at
> all likely that someone has ended a line of their custom benchmark file
> with a backslash? I'm having a hard time seeing what, other than malice,
> would prod someone to do that.
No, I was worried that the feature would pose such a risk even when
correctly implemented. But on reflection, you're right, it seems a bit
hard to credit that any existing script file would have a backslash just
before EOL. There's certainly not SQL syntax in which that could be
valid; perhaps someone would do it in a "--" comment but that seems a
tad far fetched.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vik Fearing | 2014-05-26 18:19:09 | Re: SQL access to database attributes |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-05-26 18:04:21 | Re: [PATCH] Replacement for OSSP-UUID for Linux and BSD |