Re: BUG #12725: psql: no interpretation of option -F
От | David G Johnston |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #12725: psql: no interpretation of option -F |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1422901733612-5836435.post@n5.nabble.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #12725: psql: no interpretation of option -F (Hans Ginzel <hans@matfyz.cz>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #12725: psql: no interpretation of option -F
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Hans Ginzel wrote > On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 10:24:18AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> > hans@ > writes: >>> It seems that that the command line parameter of the -F option is not >>> interpreted for escape sequences. Please add this. >> >>I think the odds of breaking things would be higher than the odds of >>improving anyone's life. >=20 > I am sorry, but I disagree. I cannot immagine someone who wants > literal \t as delimiter. > But I can imagine anyone who wants \n literaly for NULLs (-Pnull=3D'\n'). > But consensus is '\N' to distinguiahs from new line. >=20 > You can > * schedule the repair to 9.5 or 10.0, > * or you can add option like --dont-interpret-escape-seq-in-sperator > * or you can add commandline/configuration option > like --backward-compatible [=3D version_number] > * or an positive one: --moderm-postgres where such mistakes would be > repaired > and the level of =E2=80=9Cconservatism=E2=80=9D would be lowered. > Workaround is ugly and is almost not possible under Windows > unless tab completition is switched off > (http://serverfault.com/questions/210978/escape-tab-in-cmd-exe). Any solution would need to continue treating existing syntax the same - so adding flags to enable the existing behavior is not really viable. How about allowing passing in the SQL "escape me" literal: -F E'\t' David J. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.nabble.com/BUG-12725-psql-n= o-interpretation-of-option-F-tp5836358p5836435.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: