Re: Single-Transaction Utility options
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Single-Transaction Utility options |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 28077.1134759543@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Single-Transaction Utility options (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Single-Transaction Utility options
Re: Single-Transaction Utility options |
Список | pgsql-patches |
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > The following patches add a -N option to psql and pgrestore. -N seems an entirely random name for the switch ... can't we do better? I see that -t, -T, -s, -S, -x and -X are all taken, which lets out the obvious choices ... but I'd rather have no single-letter abbreviation at all than one that has zero relationship to the function of the switch. Would -1 work, or just confuse people? Also, I don't actually see any point to this in psql, as you can always do begin; \i file end; It's only pg_restore that you really need it for. Dropping the psql part of the patch might give us a little more maneuvering room as far as the switch name goes. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: