On Thursday, April 10, 2025, Kirill Reshke <reshkekir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 at 20:07, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > On 2025/04/09 19:24, Kirill Reshke wrote: > > > On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 at 14:45, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com> > wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 2025/04/09 18:25, Kirill Reshke wrote: > > >>> On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 at 13:23, jian he <jian.universal...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> hi. > > >>>> > > >>>> we allow the "COPY table TO" command to copy rows from materialized > > >>>> views in [1]. > > >>>> The attached patch is to add a tab complete for it. > > >>>> > > >>>> [1] https://git.postgresql.org/cgit/postgresql.git/commit/?id= > 534874fac0b34535c9a5ab9257d6574f78423578 > > >>> > > >>> Hi! > > >>> Patch works good for me, but I noticed that psql COPY <tab> suggests > > >>> partitioned relation both with and without this patch. Maybe that's > > >>> not a big problem, if [0] will be pushed. > > >> > > >> Is the partitioned table currently tab-completed for the COPY FROM > case? > > > > > > If I'm not mistaken, yes. I double checked. > > > > > >> INSTEAD OF INSERT triggers - though maybe that's overkill? > > > > > > That's wild to me, psql tab completions feature designed to support > > > postgresql not fully, but in frequent cases. So maybe we should keep > > > it stupud. > > > > I agree that it's reasonable to exclude such rarely used objects from > > tab-completion. How about including just tables, partitioned tables, > > foreign tables, and materialized views? > > I've attached a patch for that. > > > > Regards, > > Patch is ok. However... I concur with the premise of the patch. Tab-complete is going to happen before we know whether to/from is specified so the syntax limits our smarts here. > > If we aim to support tab-completion for all valid targets of both COPY TO > and COPY FROM, shouldn't foreign tables also be included? > > Ah.. Sorry I missed this part of your message initially. No, foreign > tables are not supported: They are supported for the From variant; valid completions need only satisfy one of to/from, not both. > > What's funny is that copying foreign tables using MV works fine > > ``` > reshke=# create materialized view mv as table ft; > SELECT 1 > reshke=# copy mv to stdout; > 228 > ``` > I don’t get why this is “funny” or otherwise surprising. David J.
