Re: Explicit psqlrc
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: David Christensen <david@endpoint.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, gabrielle <gorthx@gmail.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Mark Wong <markwkm@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-02-17T04:14:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:06 PM, David Christensen <david@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 <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +