Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: psql questions: SQL, progname, copyright dates

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: psql questions: SQL, progname, copyright dates
Date: 2004-08-29 03:39:59
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
[ There is text before PGP section. ]
[ PGP not available, raw data follows ]
> Hash: SHA1
> I was looking through the code of psql and had a few questions:
> 1. Do we want to use quote_ident on object names? Ideally, column
> names with a space in them, for example, should be surrounded by
> double quotes.

Example of it failing?  You mean like \d tablename?

> 2. There is a disconnect between what \? says:
>   \d [NAME]      describe table, index, sequence, or view
>   \d{t|i|s|v|S} [PATTERN] (add "+" for more detail)
>                  list tables/indexes/sequences/views/system tables
> and the actual default case:
>   WHERE c.relkind IN ('r','v','S','')
> Should we include indexes by default? If not, the help file should
> be clearer about what happens when no arg is given to \d.

The issue is that while \d doesn't list indexes, \d indexname works. 
Any idea how to clarify that?

> 3. I'd like to rearrange the ORDER BY on some objects to show
> user-created objects before system ones. Currently, if I create
> a new function and do a \df, I have to wade through all the
> system functions in the pg_catalog schema before seeing mine.
> This seems to be solely because "public" comes after "pg_catalog"
> alphabetically.

Well, at least they are together at the bottom.

> 4. Some of the ORDER BY clauses are incomplete, and not all are
> consistent with each other. Most seem to be ordering by schema name,
> then object name. If this the direction we want all of them to
> go? (e.g. \df)

I would think so, yea.

> 5. psql from cvs was coredumping on me earlier today when psql_error
> was called. I tracked it down to the invoking of the pset.progname
> variable in fprintf, but the problem fixed itself on the next make,
> so I don't have more detail than that. I'd appreciate if someone could
> check out the 'progname' var and see if I overlooked something.

Not sure.

> 6. Can someone run that magic year-changing update script mentioned
> earlier? The dates should be 2004, not 2003.

Running now. Thanks.

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-08-29 03:46:31
Subject: Re: pgindent run?
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2004-08-29 03:37:16
Subject: pgindent run?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group