Re: psql - -dry-run option

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: psql - -dry-run option
Date: 2015-12-17 20:47:59
Message-ID: 20151217204759.GP2618@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Joe Conway wrote:
> On 12/17/2015 11:58 AM, Christopher Browne wrote:
> > On 17 December 2015 at 14:16, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com
> > <mailto:pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>> wrote:
> >> or different idea - just enforce syntax check without execution.
> >
> > That seems pretty cool... I'd find "syntax check without execution" to
> > be pretty useful to test SQL (and especially DDL).
>
> Like this?
> https://github.com/jconway/pgsynck

I thought the idea was to test the execution of the commands themselves,
not just the syntax. Something like add a column here and see whether
this other complex UPDATE populates it correctly.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mart Kelder 2015-12-17 20:56:36 Re: [PoC] Asynchronous execution again (which is not parallel)
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2015-12-17 20:47:55 broken autocomplete in head