| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Itzinger, Oskar" <oitzinger(at)opec(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [GENERAL] [Help] Temporary Table: Implicitely created index not shown in \d i |
| Date: | 2001-06-23 00:00:46 |
| Message-ID: | 200106230000.f5N00km08631@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-patches |
> I said:
> > Hm. Shouldn't psql's \dS ignore temp items, since \d and \di do?
>
> Wait a sec --- I was confusing \dS (display system tables) with \ds
> (display sequences). It looks like the latter should get it right
> already.
test=> \ds
No relations found.
> Possibly it does make sense to suppress temp items in \dS, but there
> isn't precedent for it. We should discuss it on its own merits.
If we don't show temp items with \dS we need another backslash command
to show temp stuff. Doesn't seem worth it, especially since we don't
show much info about temp stuff except that numeric name.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-06-23 00:04:44 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Multiple Indexing, performance impact |
| Previous Message | Charles Tassell | 2001-06-22 23:40:44 | Re: select to combine 2 tables |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-06-23 01:55:22 | Re: use GUC for cmdline |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-06-22 23:22:04 | Re: Re: [GENERAL] [Help] Temporary Table: Implicitely created index not shown in \d i |