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
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 |