On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:26:55PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 04:19:30PM -0600, Ross Reedstrom wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:47:51AM -0700, David Fetter wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 02:25:44PM -0400, Gurjeet Singh wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Kevin Grittner > > > > <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > See ON_ERROR_ROLLBACK > > > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/app-psql.html > > > > > > > > > > I had missed that. Dang, this database product is rich with nice > > > > > features! :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > I would like it to be on/interactive by default, though. > > > > > > You can have it by putting it in your .psqlrc. > > > > > > If we were just starting out, I'd be all for changing the defaults, > > > but we're not. We'd break things unnecessarily if we changed this > > > default. > > > > > > > This discussion died out with a plea for better documentation, and perhaps > > some > > form of discoverability. I've scanned ahead and see no further discussion. > > However, I'm wondering, what use-cases would be broken by setting the > > default > > to 'interactive'? Running a non-interactive script by piping it to psql? > > Reading the code, I see that case is covered: the definition of > > 'interactive' > > includes both stdin and stdout are a tty, and the source of commands is > > stdin. > > Seems this functionality appeared in version 8.1. Was there discussion re: > > making it the default at that time? I'm all for backward compatibility, > > but I'm > > having trouble seeing what would break. > > > > I see that Peter blogged about this from a different angle over a year ago > > (http://petereisentraut.blogspot.com/2010/03/running-sql-scripts-with-psql.html) > > which drew a comment from Tom Lane that perhaps we need a better/different > > tool > > for running scripts. That would argue the defaults for psql proper should > > favor > > safe interactive use (autocommit off, anyone?) Peter mentioned the > > traditional > > method unix shells use to handle this: different config files are read for > > interactive vs. non-interactive startup. Seems we have that, just for the > > one > > setting ON_ERROR_ROLLBACK. > > What documentation improvement are you suggesting? The docs seem clear > to me.
Wow, that's a blast from the past: November. I think I wasn't looking for docs changes, just suggested that the thread ended with a plea from others for docs. I was wondering what supposed breakage would occur by changing the default psql ON_ERROR_ROLLBACK behavior to 'interactive', since the code guards that pretty hard to make sure it's a human in a terminal, not a redirect or script. Ross -- Ross Reedstrom, Ph.D. reeds...@rice.edu Systems Engineer & Admin, Research Scientist phone: 713-348-6166 Connexions http://cnx.org fax: 713-348-3665 Rice University MS-375, Houston, TX 77005 GPG Key fingerprint = F023 82C8 9B0E 2CC6 0D8E F888 D3AE 810E 88F0 BEDE > > -- > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us > EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com > > + It's impossible for everything to be true. + > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers