Re: Two small patches for the isolationtester lexer

Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes:
> On 21 Feb 2018, at 21:41, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I can't think of one; but I wonder if it's worth working a bit harder and
>> removing the fixed limit altogether, probably by using a PQExpBuffer.
>> If you've hit 1024 today, somebody will bump up against 2048 tomorrow.

> The thought did cross my mind, but I opted for the simple hack first.  I can
> take a stab at using a PQExpBuffer to see where that leads.

Another idea is just to teach addlitchar to realloc the buffer bigger
when necessary.  

> I also (again) forgot about the # comments not being allowed inside setup and
> teardown blocks, so patch 0002 proposes adding support for these as the
> documentation implies.  Since SQL comments will be counted towards the line
> buffer, and sent with the command, supporting both kinds of comments seems
> reasonable and consistent.
>> 
>> Hmm, not sure this is a good idea.  # is a valid SQL operator name, so
>> doing this would create some risk of breaking legal queries.  Admittedly,
>> those operators are rare enough that maybe nobody would ever need them in
>> isolationtester scripts, but I'm not sure that providing an additional
>> way to spell "comment" is worth that.

> Good point, didn’t think about that.

> cheers ./daniel