On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2012/5/26 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: >> Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: >>> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 05:39:23PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: >>>> I proposed new psql's format "shell". This format is optimized for >>>> processing returned result in shell: >> >>> I am unclear exactly how this relates to shells. >> >> What I'm unclear on is why we'd want to encourage that style of >> programming. The most charitable prediction of performance is that it >> would suck --- not only do you have all the inefficiencies inherent in >> row-by-row result processing with a shell script, but you're forcing a >> separate database connection for each query. And I don't actually see >> where it would be especially convenient to use, compared to say perl >> or python or other scripting languages. I'd rather see us worrying >> about the convenience of cases like >> >> psql ... | perl -e ... > > A performance is not important in this case - typical use case for > this feature are simple tasks - some simple maintaining - where people > can prepare SQL in psql, and later can reuse knowledge in some simple > scripts. Shell has one significant advantage against perl or python - > is everywhere (on UNIX) and it is best for very simple tasks. > > Regards > > Pavel > > > >> >> regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
bash isn't everywhere (on UNIX)... -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
