Justin Pryzby <pry...@telsasoft.com> writes: > I thought that would be desirable, although I don't see any better way of > getting there than this.
Hm, but a lot of the \d commands involve more than one underlying query, as well as a bunch of postprocessing. I doubt that the approach you seem to be using here can handle such cases. I think you have also stomped all over the semantics of query-buffer-related commands that are executed in the vicinity of a \d. Up to now, \d didn't change the query buffer. That has its uses, eg select somecol \dt some* -- how's that table spelled again? from sometable; We could maybe think about making it work by moving the \watch repetition up a level, so that exec_command() as a whole would be repeated ... but I wonder what people would think repetition of other commands such as \i, \e, \r, \if, etc etc should mean. On the whole I think this is not a can of worms I want to open. There's a clear distinction right now between plain SQL and backslash commands, and this is going to fuzz that in ways that are hard to predict the consequences of. regards, tom lane