SEO

Now that psql '\pset format wrapped' is in CVS, we should consider when
we want to use 'wrapped' format by default. I think psql \df and \dT
certainly can benefit from wrapped mode. \df+ even displays, though
there is quite a bit of wrapping.

The attached patch uses wrapped format for \d* output if the current
output format is 'aligned'. It certainly helps the \df and \dT because
those outputs have normally narrow values with a few wide values that
cause aligned output to be much too wide. The downside of the patch is
that you can no longer get 'aligned' output for \d* commands anymore
because there is no way to know if the user specified 'aligned' or if
they are just using the default.

This opens the larger question that if 'wrapped' helps with \df and \dT,
wouldn't it help with other wide user query output.

Now, we can discard this patch and tell people to set their output to
'wrapped' when they issue \d commands, but it is unlikely they will do
so. We can also tell people to just default to 'wrapped' in their
..psqlrc and then their \d commands and user queries will be in
'wrapped', or we can just default 'format' to 'wrapped' for psql.

I have heard a few people say they never way to see 'wrapped' output so
perhaps we should do nothing, but I then question whether we want \df
and \dT to be hard to read by default.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> Now that psql '\pset format wrapped' is in CVS, we should consider when
> we want to use 'wrapped' format by default. I think psql \df and \dT
> certainly can benefit from wrapped mode. \df+ even displays, though
> there is quite a bit of wrapping.
>

I for one would definitely like backslash commands with very wide
output to be wrapped by default.

> The attached patch uses wrapped format for \d* output if the current
> output format is 'aligned'. It certainly helps the \df and \dT because
> those outputs have normally narrow values with a few wide values that
> cause aligned output to be much too wide. The downside of the patch is
> that you can no longer get 'aligned' output for \d* commands anymore
> because there is no way to know if the user specified 'aligned' or if
> they are just using the default.
>

Doesn't this suggest that we need an "auto" formatting mode which has
the semantics "let psql decide what format mode I want"?

Then the people who object to wrapped mode can just set formatting to
aligned explicitly and be done with it.

I seem to recall there was some discussion of an "auto" mode in the
original wrapping thread, but if there was any meaningful conclusion I
lost it in amongst the width detection flame war.

Cheers,
BJ

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Brendan Jurd escribió:
> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > Now that psql '\pset format wrapped' is in CVS, we should consider when
> > we want to use 'wrapped' format by default. I think psql \df and \dT
> > certainly can benefit from wrapped mode. \df+ even displays, though
> > there is quite a bit of wrapping.
>
> I for one would definitely like backslash commands with very wide
> output to be wrapped by default.

(At least) one place where I would not like it is in \df+, because
wrapped function output would be more difficult to read.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 4:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> Brendan Jurd escribió:
>> I for one would definitely like backslash commands with very wide
>> output to be wrapped by default.
>
> (At least) one place where I would not like it is in \df+, because
> wrapped function output would be more difficult to read.
>

I am a bit conflicted about wrapping on \df. I agree that wrapped
function code is difficult to read, but what we've got now is
difficult to read too. Which of the two is more difficult is really a
matter of personal taste. I guess with \df you have to accept that
it's always going to be ugly, unless you have a very wide terminal (or
very short function definitions!).

Cheers,
BJ

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

* Brendan Jurd <direvus@gmail.com> [080509 14:43]:
> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 4:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> > Brendan Jurd escribió:
> >> I for one would definitely like backslash commands with very wide
> >> output to be wrapped by default.
> >
> > (At least) one place where I would not like it is in \df+, because
> > wrapped function output would be more difficult to read.
> >
>
> I am a bit conflicted about wrapping on \df. I agree that wrapped
> function code is difficult to read, but what we've got now is
> difficult to read too. Which of the two is more difficult is really a
> matter of personal taste. I guess with \df you have to accept that
> it's always going to be ugly, unless you have a very wide terminal (or
> very short function definitions!).

Isn't that what $PAGER is for?

$PAGER is the main reason why *I* don't want the wrapped format.



a.
--
Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god,
aidan@highrise.ca command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIJJ1GuVxNPsxNPScRArV5AJ4g7NIK2MmUkzeC5xLTF3 FVvOnibQCgjsqB
c0AEBnKomDlUJ73dGPU6vBA=
=ztyq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Brendan Jurd wrote:

[ email paragraphs reordered.]

> I seem to recall there was some discussion of an "auto" mode in the
> original wrapping thread, but if there was any meaningful conclusion I
> lost it in amongst the width detection flame war.

I wasn't going to bring up the 'auto' idea yet because it might confuse
things, but I guess I should address it now.

"wrapped" format doesn't wrap if the column headings don't fit the
screen width _without_ wrapping (it then uses 'aligned'). My idea was
for an 'auto' format mode to use wrapped, or expanded if wrapped can't
be displayed.

> > The attached patch uses wrapped format for \d* output if the current
> > output format is 'aligned'. It certainly helps the \df and \dT because
> > those outputs have normally narrow values with a few wide values that
> > cause aligned output to be much too wide. The downside of the patch is
> > that you can no longer get 'aligned' output for \d* commands anymore
> > because there is no way to know if the user specified 'aligned' or if
> > they are just using the default.
> >
>
> Doesn't this suggest that we need an "auto" formatting mode which has
> the semantics "let psql decide what format mode I want"?

The big problem is unless we default psql to 'auto' we can't know if
they really want 'aligned', 'wrapped', or whatever looks good on the
screen, 'auto'.

> Then the people who object to wrapped mode can just set formatting to
> aligned explicitly and be done with it.

Right, but 'wrapped' is kind of a dramatic change so we have to be sure
most people wanted 'wrapped' (or 'auto'). I think the way we did the
detection defaults will help because a default of 'auto' will only
affect screen output, by default.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

>>> "Brendan Jurd" <direvus@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
wrote:
>> Now that psql '\pset format wrapped' is in CVS, we should consider
when
>> we want to use 'wrapped' format by default. I think psql \df and
\dT
>> certainly can benefit from wrapped mode. \df+ even displays,
though
>> there is quite a bit of wrapping.
>
> I for one would definitely like backslash commands with very wide
> output to be wrapped by default.

I would prefer the default to be the current 8.2 behavior. As long as
I can configure that easily it's not a huge deal, but I may have to
deal with some users whose ad hoc queries feed into spreadsheets or
some such that will be broken until they do something new.

I currently use \x to view results about once a month (on average). I
expect to find wrapped columns useful about that often. I cut and
paste multi-line unwrapped output from my console window practically
daily, and the wrapping would make that painful. That just got me
thinking -- has anyone tried this out with EXPLAIN ANALYZE output yet?

-Kevin


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Brendan Jurd wrote:
> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 4:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> > Brendan Jurd escribi?:
> >> I for one would definitely like backslash commands with very wide
> >> output to be wrapped by default.
> >
> > (At least) one place where I would not like it is in \df+, because
> > wrapped function output would be more difficult to read.
> >
>
> I am a bit conflicted about wrapping on \df. I agree that wrapped
> function code is difficult to read, but what we've got now is
> difficult to read too. Which of the two is more difficult is really a
> matter of personal taste. I guess with \df you have to accept that
> it's always going to be ugly, unless you have a very wide terminal (or
> very short function definitions!).

Oh, good point. I hadn't thought about function bodies being displayed.
Here is an example:

test=> \pset format wrapped
Output format is wrapped.
test=> \pset columns 14
Target width for "wrapped" format is 14.
test=> select prosrc from pg_proc where proname = 'xx';
prosrc
--------------
SELECT 'a':
:text
WHERE 1 =
1
(1 row)

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> * Brendan Jurd <direvus@gmail.com> [080509 14:43]:
> > On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 4:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> > <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> > > Brendan Jurd escribi?:
> > >> I for one would definitely like backslash commands with very wide
> > >> output to be wrapped by default.
> > >
> > > (At least) one place where I would not like it is in \df+, because
> > > wrapped function output would be more difficult to read.
> > >
> >
> > I am a bit conflicted about wrapping on \df. I agree that wrapped
> > function code is difficult to read, but what we've got now is
> > difficult to read too. Which of the two is more difficult is really a
> > matter of personal taste. I guess with \df you have to accept that
> > it's always going to be ugly, unless you have a very wide terminal (or
> > very short function definitions!).
>
> Isn't that what $PAGER is for?
>
> $PAGER is the main reason why *I* don't want the wrapped format.

Not all pagers scroll width-wise --- in fact I thought most didn't.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Kevin Grittner wrote:
> >>> "Brendan Jurd" <direvus@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
> wrote:
> >> Now that psql '\pset format wrapped' is in CVS, we should consider
> when
> >> we want to use 'wrapped' format by default. I think psql \df and
> \dT
> >> certainly can benefit from wrapped mode. \df+ even displays,
> though
> >> there is quite a bit of wrapping.
> >
> > I for one would definitely like backslash commands with very wide
> > output to be wrapped by default.
>
> I would prefer the default to be the current 8.2 behavior. As long as
> I can configure that easily it's not a huge deal, but I may have to
> deal with some users whose ad hoc queries feed into spreadsheets or
> some such that will be broken until they do something new.
>
> I currently use \x to view results about once a month (on average). I
> expect to find wrapped columns useful about that often. I cut and
> paste multi-line unwrapped output from my console window practically
> daily, and the wrapping would make that painful. That just got me
> thinking -- has anyone tried this out with EXPLAIN ANALYZE output yet?

No, but I just tried it:

test=> \pset format wrapped
Output format is wrapped.
test=> \pset columns 50
Target width for "wrapped" format is 50.
test=> explain analyze select * from pg_type, pg_language;
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------
Nested Loop (cost=1.03..25.86 rows=807 width=66
5) (actual time=0.037..4.528 rows=807 loops=1)
-> Seq Scan on pg_type (cost=0.00..8.69 rows
=269 width=555) (actual time=0.018..0.377 rows=2
69 loops=1)
-> Materialize (cost=1.03..1.06 rows=3 width
=110) (actual time=0.001..0.005 rows=3 loops=269
)
-> Seq Scan on pg_language (cost=0.00.
.1.03 rows=3 width=110) (actual time=0.004..0.00
7 rows=3 loops=1)
Total runtime: 5.490 ms
(5 rows)

Of course, running it on a 50-column display in 'aligned' mode isn't
going to look good either.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers