| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "Jim Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, "pgsql-patches" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Concurrent psql patch |
| Date: | 2007-05-13 18:54:22 |
| Message-ID: | 87odko7dwh.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
>> I was originally thinking \c1, \c2, ... for \cswitch and \c& for
>> \cnowait. I'm not sure if going for cryptic short commands is better
>> or worse here.
>
> +1 for \c1, \c2, etc.
>
> What's the reasoning behind \c&? Does it "send things into the
> background" the way & does in the shell?
Sort of. It sends the *subsequent* command to the background... And unlike the
shell you can't usefully do anything more in the current session while the
command is in the background, you have to manually switch sessions before
issuing subsequent commands.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2007-05-13 20:46:41 | Re: Performance monitoring |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2007-05-13 18:54:14 | Re: Automatic adjustment of bgwriter_lru_maxpages |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2007-05-13 20:46:41 | Re: Performance monitoring |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2007-05-13 18:54:14 | Re: Automatic adjustment of bgwriter_lru_maxpages |