Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless
От | Fabien COELHO |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless |
Дата | |
Msg-id | alpine.DEB.2.20.1612060711450.14706@lancre обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Robert, >> Given the experience with pgbench and the psql context, I do not think that >> it would really need to go beyond step 2 above, but I agree that I may be >> wrong and it is best to be prepared for that from the start. Given the >> complexity and effort involved with (5), it seems wise to wait for a clearer >> motivation with actual use-cases before going that far. > > Well, my vote would be to go all the way to #5 in one commit. > Stopping short of that doesn't seem to me to save enough work to make > much sense. I don't think we're talking about anything all that > complex, and it will make future improvements a lot simpler. First, my experience as a basic patch submitter is that any patch which does more than one thing at a time, even somehow closely related changes, is asked to be split into distinct sub-patches, and is harder to get through. Second, requiring more advanced features is a recipee for getting nothing in the end, because even if not "that complex" it requires significant more time to develop. The first step I outlined is enough to handle the submitted use case and is compatible with grand plans which would change significantly psql, so seems a reasonnable intermediate target. Your experience as an seasoned core developer and a committer is probably different:-) -- Fabien.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: