On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 04:24:43PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> -- Start of PGP signed section.
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Toying around with FETCH_COUNT today, I discovered that it didn't do
> > the #1 thing I really wanted to use it for- query large tables without
> > having to worry about LIMIT to see the first couple hundred records.
> > The reason is simple- psql ignores $PAGER exiting, which means that it
> > will happily continue pulling down the entire large table long after
> > you've stopped caring, which means you still have to wait forever.
> >
> > The attached, admittedly quick hack, fixes this by having psql catch
> > SIGCHLD's using handle_sigint. I've tested this and it doesn't
> > appear to obviously break other cases where we have children (\!, for
> > example), since we're not going to be running a database query when
> > we're doing those, and if we are, and the child dies, we probably want
> > to *stop* anyway, similar to the $PAGER issue.
> >
> > Another approach that I considered was fixing various things to deal
> > cleanly with write's failing to $PAGER (I presume the writes *were*
> > failing, since less was in a defunct state, but I didn't actually
> > test). This solution was simpler, faster to code and check, and alot
> > less invasive (or so it seemed to me at the time).
> >
> > Anyway, this makes FETCH_COUNT alot more useful, and, in my view, the
> > current behaviour of completely ignoring $PAGER exiting is a bug.
>
> Plesae add this to the next commit-fest:
>
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view/inprogress
>
> Thanks.
Wouldn't this count as a bug fix?
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate