What should we do with the TODO item? Add question mark? Remove?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > Robert Treat writes:
> >> One idea I've always thought would be nice would be to make full fledged
> >> C functions out of the \ commands and ship them with the database.
>
> > The psql meta-commands are not a nicely designed set of queries that one
> > would encapsulate into a public library interface. They are created for
> > interactive use, representing precomposed views of the database that are
> > thought to be useful. If the ideas of usefulness change, then the
> > commands might change.
>
> I think that the proposal is to take describe.c more or less
> lock-stock-and-barrel out of psql and put it in the backend instead.
> It doesn't matter whether the views are orthogonal or useful for
> non-interactive purposes; they're defined to do whatever we think
> psql should show.
>
> The question is whether this gives us a useful amount of decoupling of
> psql from the backend version. Certainly the describe.c code is the
> stuff most subject to breakage across versions, but there are a lot of
> other aspects of psql that could still break. One fairly obvious
> example of backend-dependent psql code that won't be helped this way is
> the tab completion code.
>
> While I don't have any strong objection to moving the guts of these
> queries to the backend, I can't get real excited about it either;
> I suspect that psql will still be pretty version-dependent.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
>
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073