On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> and make it harder to compare entries by grepping out some common >>> substring. > >> Could you give an example of the sort of thing you wish to do? > > On that angle, I'm dubious that a format that allows omission of fields is > going to be easy for editing scripts to modify, no matter what the layout > convention is. I've found it relatively easy to write sed or even Emacs > macros to add new column values to old-school pg_proc.h ... but in this > brave new world, I'm going to be really hoping that the column default > works for 99.9% of pg_proc entries when we add a new pg_proc column, > because slipping a value into a desired position is gonna be hard for > a script when you don't know whether the adjacent existing fields are > present or not.
I wonder if we should have a tool in our repository to help people edit the file. So instead of going in there yourself and changing things by hand, or writing your own script, you can do: updatepgproc.pl --oid 5678 provolatile=v or updatepgpproc.pl --name='.*xact.*' prowhatever=someval Regardless of what format we end up with, that seems like it would make things easier. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
