From: | Shigeru Hanada <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Change format of FDW options used in \d* commands (was: Re: per-column FDW options, v5) |
Date: | 2011-08-12 10:24:03 |
Message-ID: | 4E44FF43.60201@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
(2011/08/12 1:05), Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue ago 11 11:50:40 -0400 2011:
>>> 2011/8/9 Shigeru Hanada<shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>>> I'd like to pick #3, and also change per-column options format. In
>>>> addition, I'd like to change options format for other FDW objects such
>>>> as wrappers, servers and user mappings for consistency. Of course, only
>>>> if it's acceptable to break backward compatibility...
>>>
>>> I think it's fine to change the display format. We haven't had these
>>> features for very long, so users hopefully shouldn't be expecting that
>>> everything is set in stone. We have made far bigger changes to
>>> backslash commands that have been around for far longer (\df, I'm
>>> looking at you).
>>
>> We've never promised that backslash commands behave identically across
>> releases. I think they are more for human consumption than machine, so
>> why would we care about changing one of them a bit?
>
> Yeah, I agree.
Thanks for the comments.
Attached patch changes various \d*+ commands to show FDW options in same
format as OPTIONS clause. IMHO the new format is easier to read.
Example)
old: {"delimiter=,","quote=\""}
new: delimiter ',', quote '"'
All regression tests including contrib's installcheck passed.
I'll add this patch to CF app as new item.
Regards,
--
Shigeru Hanada
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
20110812_fdw_option_format.patch | text/plain | 43.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-08-12 10:53:36 | Re: our buffer replacement strategy is kind of lame |
Previous Message | Cédric Villemain | 2011-08-12 10:20:15 | Re: index-only scans |