po 29. 1. 2024 v 17:54 odesÃlatel Steve Chavez <st...@supabase.io> napsal:
> > I like your ideas upthread about \file_read and :{filename} > > Great ideas! :{filename} looks more convenient to use than \file_read just > because it's one less command to execute. > > However, :{?variable_name} is already taken by psql to test whether a > variable is defined or not. It might be confusing to use the same syntax. > > How about using the convention of interpreting an identifier as a file > path if it has an slash on it? > > This is used in the Nix language and from experience it works very well: > https://nix.dev/manual/nix/2.18/language/values#type-path > It also makes it very clear that you're using a file path, e.g. > :{filename} vs :./filename. Examples: > > select jsonb_to_recordset(:./contents.json); > create function foo() returns text AS :/absolute/path/contents.py language > plpython3u; > > Any thoughts? > has sense Pavel > > Best regards, > Steve Chavez > > On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 at 08:42, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: > >> >> On 2024-01-26 Fr 15:17, Tom Lane wrote: >> > Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: >> >> I don't know, maybe I have a problem with the described use case. I >> cannot >> >> imagine holding the body and head of PL routines in different places >> and I >> >> don't understand the necessity to join it. >> > It seems a little weird to me too, and I would vote against accepting >> > \create_function as described because I think too few people would >> > want to use it. However, the idea of an easy way to pull in a file >> > and convert it to a SQL literal seems like it has many applications. >> > >> > >> >> >> Yes, this proposal is far too narrow and would not cater for many use >> cases I have had in the past. >> >> I like your ideas upthread about \file_read and :{filename} >> >> >> cheers >> >> >> andrew >> >> -- >> Andrew Dunstan >> EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com >> >>