From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amos Bird <amosbird(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PATCH: psql show index with type info |
Date: | 2017-03-09 18:42:40 |
Message-ID: | 20170309184240.GO9812@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Peter Eisentraut (peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> On 3/8/17 08:30, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Right, I don't think having an extra column which is going to be NULL a
> > large amount of the time is good.
>
> Note that \di already has a column "Table" that is null for something
> that is not an index. So I don't think this argument is very strong.
That's an interesting point.
I think what I find most odd about all of this is that \dti and \dit
work at all, and give a different set of columns from \dt. We don't
document that combining those works in \?, as far as I can see, and
other combinations don't work, just this.
In any case, I won't push very hard on this, it's useful information to
include and we should do so.
Thanks!
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2017-03-09 18:49:40 | Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-03-09 18:35:26 | Re: PATCH: psql show index with type info |