From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Petr Jelinek <pjmodos(at)pjmodos(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: USING clause for DO statement |
Date: | 2009-11-21 19:55:09 |
Message-ID: | 162867790911211155v496a329ak23bb9545a5f4e2d@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> The main limitation of this type of approach is that it's hard to
> properly quote a variable value that might contain any random character
> sequence. However, that's also true of the variable-interpolation stuff
> Pavel was proposing. In any case I don't think that "getting stuff from
> psql variables into a DO script" is the way to define the problem.
> It's "getting stuff from shell variables into a DO script" that is the
> real-world problem.
I am probably out, Tom
Hypothetically - when we are able to pass any value to DO script, then
I don't see problem. If I use Andrew's design - ${shellvar} and add it
to psql parser, then I could to write
\set par1 world
do $$
begin
raise notice 'Helo, % and %', $1, $2;
end;
$$ using :par1, ${USER};
> Maybe psql is the wrong tool altogether.
why - psql is very good tool. I am able to do all what I need - but
sometimes I have to use shell expansion - it's need quoting, and the
code isn't much readable. With parameters we can to separate code from
values - and an code should very clean.
Pavel
>
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-11-21 20:03:35 | Re: Hot standby and removing VACUUM FULL |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-11-21 19:50:46 | Re: Hot standby and removing VACUUM FULL |