Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:06 PM, David Christensen <da...@endpoint.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Jul 21, 2010, at 12:31 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >
> >> Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of mi? jul 21 10:24:26 -0400 2010:
> >>> On tis, 2010-07-20 at 11:48 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >>>> 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.
> >>>
> >>> What is a use case for having .psqlrc be read in noninteractive use?
> >>
> >> Even if there weren't one, why does it get applied to -f but not -c?
> >> They're both noninteractive.
> >
> >
> > So not to let the thread drop, it appears that we're faced with the
> > following situation:
>
> Hmm. I thought we almost had consensus on changing the historical
> behavior of -c. If we do that, this all gets much simpler.
Added to TODO:
Consider having psql -c read .psqlrc, for consistency
psql -f already reads .psqlrc
--
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
