Tom Lane wrote: > Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> writes: > > That being said, I don't have much of an opinion, so if you see a > > problem, then we can forget it. After all, we would need some kind of a > > prefix anyway to avoid conflicting with actual SQL... maybe "\m"? And > > that defeats a lot of the purpose. > > Yeah, requiring a prefix would make it completely pointless I think. > The submitted patch tries to avoid that by only matching syntax that's > invalid in Postgres, but that certainly limits how far we can go with > it. (And like you, I'm a bit worried about the LOAD case.) > > The last go-round on this was just a couple months ago: > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2009-11/msg00241.php > although I guess that was aimed at a slightly different idea, > namely making "show databases" etc actually *work*. This one at > least has a level of complication that's more in keeping with the > possible gain. > > The previous discussion started from the idea that only DESCRIBE, > SHOW DATABASES/TABLES, and USE were worth worrying about. If we > were to agree that we'd go that far and no farther, the potential > conflict with SQL syntax would be pretty limited. I have little > enough experience with mysql to not want to opine too much on how > useful that would be, but it does seem like those are commands > I use right away anytime I am using mysql.
Agreed. I think this discussion mirrors the psql 'help' feature we added in 8.4. After a lot of discussion we decided that a limited 'help' functionality was the best approach --- the more we added the less attractive it became. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
