Re: tab complete for COPY populated materialized view TO
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
To: Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com>
Cc: jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>,
PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-04-10T15:07:11Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- v2-0001-psql-Improve-tab-completion-for-COPY-command.patch (text/plain) patch v2-0001
On 2025/04/09 19:24, Kirill Reshke wrote: > On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 at 14:45, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2025/04/09 18:25, Kirill Reshke wrote: >>> On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 at 13:23, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> hi. >>>> >>>> we allow the "COPY table TO" command to copy rows from materialized >>>> views in [1]. >>>> The attached patch is to add a tab complete for it. >>>> >>>> [1] https://git.postgresql.org/cgit/postgresql.git/commit/?id=534874fac0b34535c9a5ab9257d6574f78423578 >>> >>> Hi! >>> Patch works good for me, but I noticed that psql COPY <tab> suggests >>> partitioned relation both with and without this patch. Maybe that's >>> not a big problem, if [0] will be pushed. >> >> Is the partitioned table currently tab-completed for the COPY FROM case? > > If I'm not mistaken, yes. I double checked. > >> INSTEAD OF INSERT triggers - though maybe that's overkill? > > That's wild to me, psql tab completions feature designed to support > postgresql not fully, but in frequent cases. So maybe we should keep > it stupud. I agree that it's reasonable to exclude such rarely used objects from tab-completion. How about including just tables, partitioned tables, foreign tables, and materialized views? I've attached a patch for that. Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION
Commits
-
psql: Improve tab completion for COPY command.
- a4c10de92912 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Allow "COPY table TO" command to copy rows from materialized views.
- 534874fac0b3 18.0 cited