Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Michael Paesold wrote:
>>Tom Lane wrote:
>>>"Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at> writes:
>>>>Robert Treat wrote:
>>>>>ISTM even a GUC to enable/disable would have been better scheme than
>>>>>what we have now; we are basically leaving no options for those who
>>>>>found the old behavior useful, while what we had before would at least
>>>>>let people switch back and forth.
>>>>I think Robert is right here and the new behaviour is a step backwards.
>>>Should we revert the patch for the time being, and take another go at it
> One idea is to hack \d not to honor \x, and let the others honor it.
> That would probably hit most of the cases people will use in 8.1.
> In fact, \d is pretty special because it is more of a group of outputs,
> unlike \df, which is a single table output.
+1 from me. That seems like a workable compromise and should probably
meet the needs of the author of the patch to change the \x behavior.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2005-10-26 14:49:12|
|Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #1993: Adding/subtracting negative time intervals|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2005-10-26 14:19:09|
|Subject: Re: BUG #1993: Adding/subtracting negative time intervals |
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2005-10-27 05:06:14|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] expanded \df+ display broken in beta4|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2005-10-26 14:11:50|
|Subject: Re: expanded \df+ display broken in beta4|