Re: [PATCHES] selecting large result sets in psql using

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Chris Mair <chrisnospam(at)1006(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] selecting large result sets in psql using
Date: 2006-08-19 12:50:41
Message-ID: 16722.1155991841@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> True. They could even put it in .psqlrc if they want. Basically need a
> way to modify \g. Seems a \set is the way we have always done such
> modifications in the past. The big question is whether this is somehow
> different. Personally, I don't think so.

If you want a \set variable, then at least make it do something useful:
make it an integer var that sets the fetch count, rather than hard-wiring
the count as is done in Chris' existing patch. Zero (or perhaps unset)
disables.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-08-19 13:27:24 Re: BugTracker (Was: Re: 8.2 features status)
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2006-08-19 12:40:58 Re: BugTracker (Was: Re: 8.2 features status)

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-08-19 22:13:42 DROP OWNED BY doesn't work
Previous Message Gregory Stark 2006-08-19 11:00:38 Concurrent connections in psql patch