2016-07-09 11:19 GMT+02:00 Fabien COELHO <coe...@cri.ensmp.fr>: > > Hello Pavel, > > Why you are introducing \into and not \gset like psql does? >> > > Good question. > > The \into syntax I implemented is more generic, you can send a bunch of > queries together and extract the results, which makes sense from a client > perspective where reducing latency is important: > > SELECT 1, 2 \; SELECT 3; > \into one two three >
I understand, but it looks little bit scary - but the argument of reducing latency can be valid > > However "gset" only works on the last SELECT and if all columns have a > name. This feature probably makes sense interactively, but for a script it > seems more useful to allow batch processing and collect results afterwards. > > Also a more subjective argument: I do not like the gset automagic naming > feature. I got more inspired by PL/pgSQL and ECPG which both have an "into" > syntax with explicit variable names that let nothing to guessing. I like > things to be simple and explicit, hence the proposed into. > the gset was originally designed differently - but now it is here - and it is not practical to have two different, but pretty similar statements in psql and pgbench. Regards Pavel > > -- > Fabien. >
