From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: strange test in psql:startup.c |
Date: | 2015-09-03 20:31:22 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmobZs4nRn10_1tShgDObQPHJMCD-TECahnYT2V7ZPTDdsQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> if (options.single_txn && options.action != ACT_FILE &&
> options.action == ACT_NOTHING)
> {
> fprintf(stderr, _("%s: -1 can only be used in
> non-interactive mode\n"), pset.progname);
> exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
> }
>
> the expression should be probably only?
>
> options.single_txn && options.action == ACT_NOTHING)
It seems this was changed by this commit:
commit c3c86ae2aff67676a49ec84240f1d6a482f359cb
Author: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Date: Mon Jun 17 21:53:33 2013 -0400
psql: Re-allow -1 together with -c or -l
I guess the idea was that we wanted to allow -1 with -c or -l even
though it will have no effect in that case. So your suggested change
looks right to me.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Petr Jelinek | 2015-09-03 21:37:09 | Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table. |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-09-03 20:21:55 | Re: Autonomous Transaction is back |