Re: To do for psql to show installable extensions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: To do for psql to show installable extensions
Date: 2015-01-12 21:25:41
Message-ID: 17434.1421097941@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Jeff Janes wrote:
>> I thought of \dx+, but the + is already used to show the objects
>> associated with the extensions. (Althought it seems like it would
>> more in keeping with other usage if \dx+ only listed the objects if it
>> was given a pattern, and did what I propose if given no pattern)

> I hate the pattern/no pattern discrepancy -- I vote not to propagate it
> any further.

The set of things that is known about an installed extension is quite
a bit different from what is known about an uninstalled-but-available
one. To make \dx print both categories would require dumbing it down
to print only the intersection of those things, or else some fancy
footwork and a lot of NULL column values. -1 for that. (This is exactly
why pg_available_extensions is separate from pg_extension in the first
place.)

I'm okay with inventing some new command like "\dxu" or "\dxa" (mnemonic
"uninstalled" or "available" respectively).

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Petr Jelinek 2015-01-12 21:33:39 Re: Sequence Access Method WIP
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2015-01-12 21:21:10 Re: To do for psql to show installable extensions