From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pgbench - allow to store select results into variables
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 16:02:23 -0400
Message-ID: <32184.1468440143@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoaFOUVh5E5qbMjV6L6ub1NFML7U+4Cx+8CvLQgRPrO4Ng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1607091005330.3412@sto>
<CAFj8pRAgU0OzGM7Vqpf2KUR0KP2YNhtG54ji06W5StGmwyQKnA@mail.gmail.com>
<alpine.DEB.2.20.1607091057300.3412@sto>
<CAFj8pRBGrdiroRyJgCjtOmOrHCQu0L8KDGLU5czD2q+jF8bUxQ@mail.gmail.com>
<alpine.DEB.2.20.1607091441480.3412@sto>
<CA+TgmoaFOUVh5E5qbMjV6L6ub1NFML7U+4Cx+8CvLQgRPrO4Ng@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:
>> If someone thinks that "gset" is a good idea for pgbench, which I don't, it
>> could be implemented. I think that an "into" feature, like PL/pgSQL & ECPG,
>> makes more sense for scripting.
> I agree: I like \into.
> But:
>> SELECT 1, 2 \; SELECT 3;
>> \into one two three
> I think that's pretty weird.
Yeah, that's seriously nasty action-at-a-distance in my view. I'd be okay
with
SELECT 1, 2 \into one two
SELECT 3 \into three
but I do not think that a metacommand on a following line should
retroactively affect the execution of a prior command, much less commands
before the last one. Even if this happens to be easy to do in pgbench's
existing over-contorted logic, it's tremendously confusing to the user;
and it might be much less easy if we try to refactor that logic.
And I'm with Pavel on this: it should work exactly like \gset. Inventing
\into to do almost the same thing in a randomly different way exhibits a
bad case of NIH syndrome. Sure, you can argue about how it's not quite
the same use-case and so you could micro-optimize by doing it differently,
but that's ignoring the cognitive load on users who have to remember two
different commands. Claiming that plpgsql's SELECT INTO is a closer
analogy than psql's \gset is quite bogus, too: the environment is
different (client side vs server side, declared vs undeclared target
variables), and the syntax is different (backslash or not, commas or not,
just for starters). I note also that we were talking a couple months ago
about trying to align psql and pgbench backslash commands more closely.
This would not be a good step in that direction.
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
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, coelho@cri.ensmp.fr, pavel.stehule@gmail.com
Subject: Re: pgbench - allow to store select results into variables
In-Reply-To: <32184.1468440143@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox