Re: pgbench \for or similar loop

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgbench \for or similar loop
Date: 2011-04-20 14:46:48
Message-ID: BANLkTik0fQrDcOxBwN5bKvDKgXO3Y06tjA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Excerpts from David Fetter's message of mié abr 20 10:54:56 -0300 2011:
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 08:05:07AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> > Hello
>> >
>> > I played with psql extensions two years ago - it can do it
>>
>> It's interesting, but it doesn't solve the fundamental problem, which
>> is to allow every client, not just psql, to do this.
>
> Why is this problem fundamental?

I happen to like your idea, even if we had stored procedures...they
have a lot of overlap but so what?. We have server side \copy and
client side COPY -- both are useful. Likewise, (getting back to the
original point of the thread), bechmarking via client scripting and
via procedure are also both useful. Nobody will gripe if psql gets
more features like this -- some people really want to do this on the
client side and there are valid reasons to do that, say, to intermix
client local shell commands between sql lines.

merlin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2011-04-20 14:53:34 Re: Typed table DDL loose ends
Previous Message Noah Misch 2011-04-20 14:44:10 Re: Typed table DDL loose ends