From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
        Daniel Verite <daniel@manitou-mail.org>
Subject: Re: psql --help=variables missing csv_fieldsep
In-reply-to: <202511032011.xiybfttm3rwc@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <202511032011.xiybfttm3rwc@alvherre.pgsql>
Comments: In-reply-to =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
	message dated "Mon, 03 Nov 2025 21:20:28 +0100"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <374721.1762203209.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2025 15:53:29 -0500
Message-ID: <374722.1762203209@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/374722.1762203209%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

=?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> writes:
> On 2025-Nov-03, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But wait ... is it actually a variable?  help.c does list it, but
>> as a \pset option:

> Yeah, there are two lists: one here in the "\?" output, and another in
> the "\? variables" output, which is also `psql --help=variables`.  It
> lists actual variables but also \pset options and environment variables
> psql recognizes.

Huh.  I would not have called \pset options variables, but I guess
somebody thought it made sense.

> I find this one you quote somewhat unreadable, so I
> was going to propose to remove it, and instead direct the user to look
> at "\?  variables" for the exhaustive list.  That one is also a bit
> easier to cross-check, I think.  (There's also tab-complete.)

Agreed that the set of \pset options has bloated to the point where
that presentation is unreadable.

			regards, tom lane