From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgbench post-connection command |
Date: | 2012-01-12 16:50:25 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nM+pg2eGyBwxaFm4bn1KTDSn566-e8fWkOEPb9OBZ0_Diw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> This seems rather poorly designed, mainly because there's no reason to
>>> think that a single command would be sufficient.
>
>> It supports multiple commands via multi-statement requests
>> e.g.
>> -x "SET this = on; SET that = off"
>
> I don't believe that works for multiple \set commands, which is the
> more likely use-case for this; as noted upthread, executing SET here
> is quite unnecessary since you can get that behavior with
> "export PGOPTIONS".
OK, so you want...
\setonce <command>
or?
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Mead | 2012-01-12 16:57:24 | Re: IDLE in transaction introspection |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-01-12 16:33:26 | Re: Remembering bug #6123 |