On 8/7/21 10:56 AM, Platon Pronko wrote:
> Hi!
>
>>>>>> I also find this annoying and would be happy to be rid of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you tried "\pset format wrapped"? Pavel suggested it, and it
>>>>> solved most of the problem for me, for example.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but it changes the data line output. Ideally, you should be able
>>>> to modify these independently.
>>>
>>> I agree, and I think this can be implemented, but I'm a bit afraid of
>>> introducing an additional psql option (there's already quite a lot of
>>> them).
>>> I suspect primary PostgreSQL maintainers won't be happy with such an
>>> approach.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I think I qualify as one of those ... :-)
>
> Sorry, I'm new here, don't know who's who :)
No problem. Welcome! We're always very glad to see new contributors.
>
> I'll start working on a new patch then. A couple questions about
> specifics:
>
> 1. Can we add "expanded" in the option name, like
> "xheader_expanded_width"?
> I think adjusting the header row width doesn't make sense on any other
> modes,
> and placing that in the option name makes intent a bit clearer.
"xheader" was meant to be shorthand for "expanded output header"
>
> 2. What was "column" option in your original suggestion supposed to do?
> ("\pset xheader_width column|page|nnn")
It's meant to say don't print anything past the column spec, e.g.:
-[ RECORD 1 ]----+
n | 42
long_column_name | xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-[ RECORD 2 ]----+
n | 210
long_column_name |
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> 3. Should we bother with using this option when in "\pset border 2" mode?
> I can do it for consistency, but it will still look bad.
>
>
Probably not, but since I never use it I'll let others who do weigh in
on the subject.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com