Dawid Kuroczko escribió: > Hmm, seems doable.
I think that the followup discussion leads to implementing just \G (and \x auto). > I think there should be a format Enum, which would take values like NORMAL, > EXTENDED, and EXTENDED_ONCE -- but this would be a much more invasive patch. > Oh, and coincidentally its where AUTO format should go. :) If the code ends up better with a more invasive patch, by all means do that. > 3. We should decide how each of the "commands" work in auto mode. > I think it should be something like: "if output is less or equal than > screen width -- use normal mode, else extended". I we have \g and \G, > they should be handled a bit differently in auto mode: > ";" -- perform automatic format adjustment > "\g" -- force normal mode (probably for file-output) > "\G" -- force extended mode (probably for file-output). > I especially would like an opinion on this from you. Sounds good -- in auto mode, you can override it if you want (unless it is one backslash command, but I don't think that's a problem) > 4. And as for using "\x" for the one-shot expanded output, I think it would > be possible to allow queries like: > SELECT * FROM foo\x > ...but I think fundamental problem with this approach is that it promotes > "\x" to be able to submit query. I don't think its a good idea. No, I don't think this is a good idea either. Let's just not implement \x. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers