Re: proposal: multiple psql option -c

On 07/28/2015 11:52 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>
> 2015-07-28 15:16 GMT+02:00 Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net
> <mailto:andrew@dunslane.net>>:
>
>
>     On 07/28/2015 12:08 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>
>
>         2015-07-28 5:24 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule
>         <pavel.stehule@gmail.com <mailto:pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
>         <mailto:pavel.stehule@gmail.com
>         <mailto:pavel.stehule@gmail.com>>>:
>
>
>
>             2015-07-27 21:57 GMT+02:00 Andrew Dunstan
>         <andrew@dunslane.net <mailto:andrew@dunslane.net>
>             <mailto:andrew@dunslane.net <mailto:andrew@dunslane.net>>>:
>
>
>                 On 07/27/2015 02:53 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>                     I am trying to run parallel execution
>
>                     psql -At -c "select datname from pg_database"
>         postgres |
>                     xargs -n 1 -P 3 psql -c "select current_database()"
>
>
>
>
>                 I don't think it's going to be a hugely important
>         feature, but
>                 I don't see a problem with creating a new option (-C seems
>                 fine) which would have the same effect as if the arguments
>                 were contatenated into a file which is then used with
>         -f. IIRC
>                 -c has some special characteristics which means it's
>         probably
>                 best not to try to extend it for this feature.
>
>
>             ok, I'll try to write patch.
>
>
>         I have a question. Can be -C option multiple?
>
>         The SQL is without problem, but what about \x command?
>
>         postgres=# \dt \dn select 10;
>         No relations found.
>         List of schemas
>         ┌──────┬───────┐
>         │ Name │ Owner │
>         ╞══════╪═══════╡
>         └──────┴───────┘
>         (0 rows)
>
>         \dn: extra argument "10;" ignored
>
>
>
>     I don't understand the question.
>
>     You should include one sql or psql command per -C option, ISTM. e.g.
>
>         psql -C '\dt' -C '\dn' -C 'select 10;'
>
>
>     Isn't that what we're talking about with this whole proposal?
>
>
>
> I am searching some agreement, how to solve a current "-c" limits. I
> am 100% for >>> psql -C '\dt' -C '\dn' -C 'select 10;' <<<
>
>

I think you're probably best off leaving -c alone. If there are issues
to be solved for -c they should be handled separately from the feature
we agree on.

cheers

andrew