Re: Oddity with psql \d and pg_table_is_visible

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Oddity with psql \d and pg_table_is_visible
Date: 2007-09-05 19:27:50
Message-ID: 21451.1189020470@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> writes:
> While this is correct on a per-relation level, I'm thinking that it's
> not what we'd really like to have happen in psql. What I'd like \d to do
> is show me everything in any schema that's in my search_path, even if
> there's something higher in the search_path that would over-ride it.
> ISTM that's what most people would expect out of \d.

I don't agree with that reasoning in the least, particularly not if you
intend to "fix" it by redefining pg_table_is_visible() ...

What will happen if we change \d to work that way is that it will show
you a table, and you'll try to access it, and you'll get the wrong table
because the access will go to the one that really is visible.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2007-09-05 20:06:07 Re: Reducing Transaction Start/End Contention
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-09-05 19:16:47 Re: Should pointers to PGPROC be volatile-qualified?