From: | Shinya Kato <Shinya11(dot)Kato(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | katouknl <katouknl(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
Cc: | Suraj Khamkar <khamkarsuraj(dot)b(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Added TRANSFORM FOR for COMMENT tab completion |
Date: | 2021-10-15 04:29:12 |
Message-ID: | ab15d09688c639d00d1013ad2f5f325d@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2021-10-14 14:30, katouknl wrote:
>> It is very good, but it seems to me that there are some tab-completion
>> missing in COMMENT command.
>> For example,
>> - CONSTRAINT ... ON DOMAIN
>> - OPERATOR CLASS
>> - OPERATOR FAMILY
>> - POLICY ... ON
>> - [PROCEDURAL]
>> - RULE ... ON
>> - TRIGGER ... ON
>>
>> I think these tab-comletion also can be improved and it's a good
>> timing for that.
>
> Thank you for the comments!
>
> I fixed where you pointed out.
Thank you for the update!
I tried "COMMENT ON OPERATOR ...", and an operator seemed to be
complemented with double quotation marks.
However, it caused the COMMENT command to fail.
---
postgres=# COMMENT ON OPERATOR "+" (integer, integer) IS 'test_fail';
ERROR: syntax error at or near "("
LINE 1: COMMENT ON OPERATOR "+" (integer, integer) IS 'test_fail';
postgres=# COMMENT ON OPERATOR + (integer, integer) IS 'test_success';
COMMENT
---
So, I think as with \do command, you do not need to complete the
operators.
Do you think?
--
Regards,
--
Shinya Kato
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Nancarrow | 2021-10-15 04:30:37 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2021-10-15 03:20:25 | Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson |