| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: Displaying and dumping of table access methods |
| Date: | 2019-01-09 17:23:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20190109172348.46s4safxcmc5qcux@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2019-01-09 18:26:16 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:04 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> +1.
>
> > Don't like it
> > too much, but it seems better than the alternative. I wonder if we want
> > one for multiple regression related issues, or whether one specifically
> > about table AMs is more appropriate. I lean towards the latter.
> >
>
> I didn't understand what is the earlier part "I wonder if we want one
> for multiple regression related issues". What do you mean by multiple
> regression related issues?
One flag that covers all things that make psql output less useful for
regression test output, or one flag that just controls the table access
method display.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bossart, Nathan | 2019-01-09 18:42:40 | Re: A few new options for vacuumdb |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-01-09 17:18:06 | Re: FETCH FIRST clause PERCENT option |