From: | "Brendan Jurd" <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Bernd Helmle" <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: Separate psql commands from arguments |
Date: | 2008-04-05 01:33:30 |
Message-ID: | 37ed240d0804041833h655503fk9e54292f79ab5129@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Brendan Jurd" writes:
> > Okay, but what on earth is "\c&" and what would you expect it to do
> > when it "works"? I suppose you're connecting to a database, but
> > somehow I don't think you're talking about a database with the name
> > "&".
>
> Sorry, it was in a patch I submitted a while ago to do concurrent connections.
> It's supposed to be like & in the shell -- which doesn't require a space
> before it. I was just explaining in a parenthetical comment the only reason I
> was personally fond of that feature. It's not an important factor.
>
Ah, thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't tuned into the concurrent
connections thread.
I agree that having shell-like behaviours is a useful goal. The good
news is, if we had a psql where the command and the arguments are
always separated, we could just make \c& a separate command from \c.
Cheers,
BJ
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://getfiregpg.org
iD8DBQFH9tbk5YBsbHkuyV0RAuohAKDYa6/hTEqVQr5nYlsZLLu14NuwzwCeOmVF
854P3drq/8+SrMwcbhUFNw4=
=PjSp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-04-05 01:34:58 | Re: [HACKERS] Minor changes to Recovery related code |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-04-05 01:17:10 | Re: modules |