On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 6:50 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Marko Tiikkaja <ma...@joh.to> writes: > > On 10/29/15 11:51 AM, Daniel Verite wrote: > >> Personally I think it would be worth having, but how about > >> booleans inside ROW() or composite types ? > > > There's not enough information sent over to do that in the client. > > Note that this works the same way as \pset null with SELECT > > ROW(NULL), so I don't consider it a show stopper for the patch. > > The problem with that argument is that \pset null is already a kluge > (but at least a datatype-independent one). Now you've added a datatype > specific kluge of the same ilk. It might be useful, it might be short, > but that doesn't make it not a kluge. > > The really key argument that hasn't been addressed here is why does such > a behavior belong in psql, rather than elsewhere? Surely legibility > problems aren't unique to psql users. Moreover, there are exactly > parallel facilities for other datatypes on the server side: think > DateStyle Which provides a finite set of possible values. > or bytea_output. Wasn't this added mostly for performance as opposed to dealing with "locale/style" considerations? So if you were trying to follow precedent > rather than invent a kluge, you'd have submitted a patch to create a GUC > that changes the output of boolout(). > > I'm leaning toward doing this in the client if its offered at all. An unobtrusive usability enhancement - even if limited to non-embedded situations - that seems like little effort for a measurable gain. David J.
