Re: Showing parallel status in \df+

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Masao Fujii <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Showing parallel status in \df+
Date: 2016-09-28 19:59:26
Message-ID: 20160928195926.GA358302@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Pavel Stehule wrote:

> I am sorry, I disagree. Proposed form is hard readable. Is not possible to
> simply copy/paste.

Why do you care? You can use \sf if you want to copy&paste the
function code.

> I cannot to imagine any use case for proposed format.

My vote (which was not counted by Stephen) was to remove it from \df+
altogether. I stand by that. People who are used to seeing the output
in \df+ will wonder "where the heck did it go" and eventually figure it
out, at which point it's no longer a problem. We're not breaking
anyone's scripts, that's for sure.

If we're not removing it, I +0 support the option of moving it to
footers. I'm -1 on doing nothing.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2016-09-28 20:02:55 Re: Showing parallel status in \df+
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2016-09-28 19:17:46 Re: Add support for restrictive RLS policies