Re: trailing comment ghost-timing

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Bruce Momjian
Тема Re: trailing comment ghost-timing
Дата
Msg-id 20140331180628.GB18559@momjian.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: trailing comment ghost-timing  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: trailing comment ghost-timing  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 08:20:59PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > On 2013-12-24 12:27:59 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> What I was proposing was that we do include comments in what we send,
> >> as long as those comments are embedded in the statement text, not
> >> on lines before it.
> 
> > The common way I've seen what I've described above done as is something
> > like:
> > /* File:path/to/some/file.whatever Function:foo::something()
> >  * Comment: Expensive, but that's ok!
> >  */
> > SELECT here_comes FROM my WHERE some_sql;
> 
> > If I unerstood what you propose correctly, we'd now drop that comment,
> > where we sent it before?
> 
> Yeah.  But I just noticed that this would cause the regression test
> results to change dramatically --- right now, most "-- comment" comments
> get echoed to the output, and that would stop.  So maybe it's not such
> a great idea after all.

Where are we on this?  It seem odd that psql sends /* */ comments to the
server, but not "--" comments.  Should this be documented or changed?

I am confused why changing the behavior would affect the regression test
output as -- and /* */ comments already appear, and it was stated that
"--" comments are already not sent to the server.

Everyone agreed that suppressing \timing output for a PGRES_EMPTY_QUERY
return result was not a good idea.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + Everyone has their own god. +



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Sergey Konoplev
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Cube extension kNN support
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: doPickSplit stack buffer overflow in XLogInsert?