Re: psql: add \pset true/false
От | David G. Johnston |
---|---|
Тема | Re: psql: add \pset true/false |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAKFQuwYo+O=PygEZj6TSYT4gTXUJsTZYN_KMegEkJFmreK0etw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: psql: add \pset true/false (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: psql: add \pset true/false
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to> writes:
> On 10/29/15 11:51 AM, Daniel Verite wrote:
>> Personally I think it would be worth having, but how about
>> booleans inside ROW() or composite types ?
> There's not enough information sent over to do that in the client.
> Note that this works the same way as \pset null with SELECT
> ROW(NULL), so I don't consider it a show stopper for the patch.
The problem with that argument is that \pset null is already a kluge
(but at least a datatype-independent one). Now you've added a datatype
specific kluge of the same ilk. It might be useful, it might be short,
but that doesn't make it not a kluge.
The really key argument that hasn't been addressed here is why does such
a behavior belong in psql, rather than elsewhere? Surely legibility
problems aren't unique to psql users. Moreover, there are exactly
parallel facilities for other datatypes on the server side: think
DateStyle
Which provides a finite set of possible values.
or bytea_output.
Wasn't this added mostly for performance as opposed to dealing with "locale/style" considerations?
So if you were trying to follow precedent
rather than invent a kluge, you'd have submitted a patch to create a GUC
that changes the output of boolout().
I'm leaning toward doing this in the client if its offered at all. An unobtrusive usability enhancement - even if limited to non-embedded situations - that seems like little effort for a measurable gain.
David J.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: