On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:23 AM, David Christensen <da...@endpoint.com> wrote: >> Well, IIRC, one of -c and -f suppresses psqlrc, and the other does >> not. This doesn't seem very consistent to me, but I'm not sure >> there's much to be done about it at this point. I guess if you use >> whichever one suppresses psqlrc even once, it's suppressed, and >> otherwise it's not. :-( > > That seems sub-optimal; I can see people wanting to use this feature to do > something like: > > psql -c 'set work_mem = blah' -f script.sql > > and then being surprised when it works differently than just `psql -f > script.sql`.
I agree... but then they might also be surprised if psql -c 'something' works differently from psql -c 'something' -f /dev/null > Although I wonder if the general usecase for .psqlrc is just in interactive > mode; i.e., hypothetically if you're running scripts that are sensitive to > environment, you're running with -X anyway; so maybe that's not that big of a > deal, as it's kind of an implied -X with multiple -c or -f commands. And if > you really wanted it, we could add a flag to explicitly include .psqlrc (or > the user could just specify -f path/to/psqlrc). It's tempting to propose making .psqlrc apply only in interactive mode, period. But that would be an incompatibility with previous releases, and I'm not sure it's the behavior we want, either. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
