Re: add line number as prompt option to psql

Hi,

Found two (A and B) issues with latest patch:

A:
-- Set prompts
postgres=# \set PROMPT1 '%/[%l]%R%# '
postgres[1]=# \set PROMPT2 '%/[%l]%R%# '

postgres[1]=#
postgres[1]=# select
postgres[2]-# *
postgres[3]-# from
postgres[4]-# abc;
ERROR: relation "abc" does not exist
LINE 4: abc;
^

Now I used \e to edit the source. Deleted last line i.e. "abc;" and
returned to prompt, landed at line 4, typed "abc;"

postgres[1]=# \e
postgres[4]-# abc;
ERROR: relation "abc" does not exist
LINE 5: abc;
^

In above steps, error message says "LINE 5", where as on prompt "abc" is at
line 4.

postgres[1]=# select
*
from
abc;
ERROR: relation "abc" does not exist
LINE 4: abc;
^

Here I again see error at line 4. Something fishy. Please investigate.
Looks like bug in LINE numbering in error message, not sure though.
But with prompt line number feature, it should be sync to each other.

B:
However, I see that you have removed the code changes related to INT_MAX.
Why?
I have set cur_line to INT_MAX - 2 and then observed that after 2 lines I
start getting negative numbers.

Thanks

On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 10:48 PM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Jeevan Chalke
> <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > Hi Sawada Masahiko,
> >
> > I liked this feature. So I have reviewed it.
> >
> > Changes are straight forward and looks perfect.
> > No issues found with make/make install/initdb/regression.
> >
> > However I would suggest removing un-necessary braces at if, as we have
> only
> > one statement into it.
> >
> > if (++cur_line >= INT_MAX)
> > {
> > cur_line = 1;
> > }
> >
> > Also following looks wrong:
> >
> > postgres[1]=# select
> > postgres[2]-# *
> > postgres[3]-# from
> > postgres[4]-# tab;
> > a
> > ---
> > (0 rows)
> >
> > postgres[1]=# select
> > *
> > from
> > tab
> > postgres[2]-# where t > 10;
> > ERROR: column "t" does not exist
> > LINE 5: where t > 10;
> > ^
> >
> > Line number in ERROR is 5 which is correct.
> > But line number in psql prompt is wrong.
> >
> > To get first 4 lines I have simply used up arrow followed by an enter for
> > which I was expecting 5 in psql prompt.
> > But NO it was 2 which is certainly wrong.
> >
> > Need to handle above carefully.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com
> >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> The attached IWP patch is one prompt option for psql, which shows
> >> current line number.
> >> If the user made syntax error with too long SQL then psql outputs
> >> message as following.
> >>
> >> ERROR: syntax error at or near "a"
> >> LINE 250: hoge
> >> ^
> >> psql teaches me where syntax error is occurred, but it is not kind
> >> when SQL is too long.
> >> We can use write SQL with ¥e(editor) command(e.g., emacs) , and we can
> >> know line number.
> >> but it would make terminal log dirty . It will make analyzing of log
> >> difficult after error is occurred.
> >> (I think that we usually use copy & paste)
> >>
> >> After attached this patch, we will be able to use %l option as prompting
> >> option.
> >>
> >> e.g.,
> >> $ cat ~/.psqlrc
> >> \set PROMPT2 '%/[%l]%R%# '
> >> \set PROMPT1 '%/[%l]%R%# '
> >> $ psql -d postgres
> >> postgres[1]=# select
> >> postgres[2]-# *
> >> postgres[3]-# from
> >> postgres[4]-# hoge;
> >>
> >> The past discussion is following.
> >>
> >> <
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFj8pRC1ruPk6+chA1jpxPh3uS_zipaBDOvmcEex4wPbp2kZMQ@mail.gmail.com
> >
> >>
> >> Please give me feedback.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> -------
> >> Sawada Masahiko
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> >> To make changes to your subscription:
> >> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeevan B Chalke
> > Principal Software Engineer, Product Development
> > EnterpriseDB Corporation
> > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
> >
> > Phone: +91 20 30589500
> >
> > Website: www.enterprisedb.com
> > EnterpriseDB Blog: http://blogs.enterprisedb.com/
> > Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/enterprisedb
> >
> > This e-mail message (and any attachment) is intended for the use of the
> > individual or entity to whom it is addressed. This message contains
> > information from EnterpriseDB Corporation that may be privileged,
> > confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are
> not
> > the intended recipient or authorized to receive this for the intended
> > recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, retention, archiving, or
> > copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received
> > this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply
> e-mail
> > and delete this message.
>
> Thank you for reviewing patch, and sorry for late response.
>
> I have updated this patch, and attached it.
>
> > postgres[1]=# select
> > *
> > from
> > tab
> > postgres[2]-# where t > 10;
> > ERROR: column "t" does not exist
> > LINE 5: where t > 10;
> Attached patch can handle this case.
>
> Please give me feedback.
>
> Regards,
>
> -------
> Sawada Masahiko
>

--
Jeevan B Chalke
Principal Software Engineer, Product Development
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Phone: +91 20 30589500

Website: www.enterprisedb.com
EnterpriseDB Blog: http://blogs.enterprisedb.com/
Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/enterprisedb

This e-mail message (and any attachment) is intended for the use of the
individual or entity to whom it is addressed. This message contains
information from EnterpriseDB Corporation that may be privileged,
confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are
not the intended recipient or authorized to receive this for the intended
recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, retention, archiving, or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail
and delete this message.