Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-08-24 Thread Stephen Frost
* Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:24:34PM +0200, Tobias Bussmann wrote: > > I've tested the new \gx against 10beta and current git HEAD. Actually one > > of my favourite features of PostgreSQL 10! However in my environment it was > > behaving strangely. After

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-08-23 Thread Stephen Frost
* Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:24:34PM +0200, Tobias Bussmann wrote: > > I've tested the new \gx against 10beta and current git HEAD. Actually one > > of my favourite features of PostgreSQL 10! However in my environment it was > > behaving strangely. After

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-08-19 Thread Stephen Frost
Noah, all, * Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:24:34PM +0200, Tobias Bussmann wrote: > > I've tested the new \gx against 10beta and current git HEAD. Actually one > > of my favourite features of PostgreSQL 10! However in my environment it was > > behaving

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-08-16 Thread Stephen Frost
Noah, all, On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 22:24 Noah Misch wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:24:34PM +0200, Tobias Bussmann wrote: > > I've tested the new \gx against 10beta and current git HEAD. Actually > one of my favourite features of PostgreSQL 10! However in my environment

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-08-16 Thread Noah Misch
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:24:34PM +0200, Tobias Bussmann wrote: > I've tested the new \gx against 10beta and current git HEAD. Actually one of > my favourite features of PostgreSQL 10! However in my environment it was > behaving strangely. After some debugging I found that \gx does not work if

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-08-15 Thread Tobias Bussmann
I've tested the new \gx against 10beta and current git HEAD. Actually one of my favourite features of PostgreSQL 10! However in my environment it was behaving strangely. After some debugging I found that \gx does not work if you have \set FETCH_COUNT n before. Please find attached a patch that

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-03-07 Thread Stephen Frost
* Daniel Verite (dan...@manitou-mail.org) wrote: > Christoph Berg wrote: > > > Both fixed, thanks for the review! Version 3 attached. > > It looks good to me. > > Stephen Frost is also reviewer on the patch, so I'm moving the > status back to "Needs review" at >

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-03-07 Thread Daniel Verite
Christoph Berg wrote: > Both fixed, thanks for the review! Version 3 attached. It looks good to me. Stephen Frost is also reviewer on the patch, so I'm moving the status back to "Needs review" at https://commitfest.postgresql.org/13/973/ and let him proceed. Best regards, -- Daniel

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-03-06 Thread Christoph Berg
Re: Daniel Verite 2017-03-03 <4d84079e-325b-48c5-83e6-bb54bb567...@manitou-mail.org> > - tab-completion: works but the list in tab-complete.c:backslash_commands[] > is sorted alphabetically so "\\gx" should come after "\\gset" Good catch, it was still in that place from when it was named \G. In

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-03-03 Thread Daniel Verite
Christoph Berg wrote: > The new version tests \g and \gx with a new query, and > re-running it on the last query buffer. Thanks, here's a review: The patch compiles and works as expected. The code follows the same pattern as other one-shot command modifiers, setting a flag in the

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-02-09 Thread David Fetter
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 11:12:00AM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote: > Re: David Fetter 2017-02-08 <20170208151214.ga8...@fetter.org> > > Would you be open to saving the next person some work by doing > > something similar to how \d is done, namely looking for an 'x' > > modifier after g without regard

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-02-09 Thread Christoph Berg
Re: David Fetter 2017-02-08 <20170208151214.ga8...@fetter.org> > Would you be open to saving the next person some work by doing > something similar to how \d is done, namely looking for an 'x' > modifier after g without regard to how far after? As of this writing, > the \d version starts at line

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-02-08 Thread David Fetter
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 03:52:40PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote: > Re: David Fetter 2017-02-07 <20170207051659.gc3...@fetter.org> > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 08:54:13PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote: > > > The majority of voices here was in favor of using \gx, so here is > > > another version of the

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-02-08 Thread Christoph Berg
Re: David Fetter 2017-02-07 <20170207051659.gc3...@fetter.org> > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 08:54:13PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote: > > The majority of voices here was in favor of using \gx, so here is > > another version of the same patch which implements that. > > Patch is useful, and works as

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-02-06 Thread David Fetter
On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 08:54:13PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote: > The majority of voices here was in favor of using \gx, so here is > another version of the same patch which implements that. Patch is useful, and works as documented. Maybe it could get a test or two in src/test/regress/*/psql.*

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \gx

2017-02-06 Thread Christoph Berg
The majority of voices here was in favor of using \gx, so here is another version of the same patch which implements that. Christoph diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/psql-ref.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/psql-ref.sgml new file mode 100644 index ae58708..e0302ea *** a/doc/src/sgml/ref/psql-ref.sgml ---