Re: Transaction status in default psql prompt?

From: Darcy Buskermolen <darcy(at)wavefire(dot)com>
To: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Transaction status in default psql prompt?
Date: 2003-09-03 21:44:21
Message-ID: 200309031444.21458.darcy@wavefire.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wednesday 03 September 2003 13:06, Rod Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-09-03 at 19:53, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > What do people think about adding the transaction status indicator to the
> > default psql prompt, so it'd look something like this:
> >
> > peter=# begin;
> > BEGIN
> > peter*=# foo;
> > ERROR: syntax error at or near "foo" at character 1
> > peter!=# rollback;
> > ROLLBACK
> > peter=#
> >
> > I think many people would find that useful.
>
> Great idea. Would it be worth while adding the depth with the
> assumption that sub-transactions will appear someday?

I think this is a good idea as well. While we are on this, has there
ever/recently been any thought to not making transactions marked "failed" in
the event of a syntax error (given we don't have nested transactions), this
becomes most annoying when having to do a large manual set of updates and one
gets sloppy with typing?

--
Darcy Buskermolen
Wavefire Technologies Corp.
ph: 250.717.0200
fx: 250.763.1759
http://www.wavefire.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-09-03 22:07:47 Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-09-03 21:32:27 Re: Using oids