Re: Concurrent psql patch
| От | David Fetter |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Concurrent psql patch |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20070513170042.GA14860@fetter.org обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Concurrent psql patch (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Concurrent psql patch
|
| Список | pgsql-patches |
On Sun, May 13, 2007 at 02:39:45PM +0100, Gregory Stark wrote: > "Jim Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org> writes: > > > I don't see how we could make the names shorter without moving > > away from a backslash command (which I'm guessing would be > > painful). > > > > Assuming we're stuck with a backslash command \cs[witch] and \cn > > [owait] seem to be about as good as we could get. > > I don't have \cs or \cn set up as abbreviations. > > I was originally thinking \c1, \c2, ... for \cswitch and \c& for > \cnowait. I'm not sure if going for cryptic short commands is better > or worse here. +1 for \c1, \c2, etc. What's the reasoning behind \c&? Does it "send things into the background" the way & does in the shell? Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Skype: davidfetter Remember to vote! Consider donating to PostgreSQL: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: