Re: Consistent \d commands in psql

From: "Brendan Jurd" <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Consistent \d commands in psql
Date: 2008-04-01 21:39:00
Message-ID: 37ed240d0804011439v5dd316c4j5cfacf8b671ed6df@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/04/2008, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter writes:
> > When we have a bad default--and I'd argue that for anyone not
> > developing PostgreSQL itself, showing system functions is a bad
> > default--we should change it to something sane.
>
> I disagree with your parenthetical argument here, mainly on the strength
> of Greg's point about how that might hide the existence of conflicts.
> But in any case the discussion here is first about what set of behaviors
> we need to provide, and only second about which one should be default.
>

If I read Greg's latter proposal correctly, he was suggesting

\df Lists all user functions
\df [pattern] Lists both system and user functions matching [pattern]
\df * Lists all system and user functions

This doesn't provide is "all system functions only", but:

1. That list is way too long to be of much use in a psql context
2. You can still do a \df pg_catalog.* if you're really that keen.

It also doesn't provide "only user functions matching [pattern]", but
is that really a problem? I suppose you could conceive of a situation
where somebody is looking for all the user funcs matching "int*" and
getting annoyed by having to scroll past ~200 system funcs, but you
can always refine your pattern, or clamp it to a particular schema.

Regards,
BJ
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://getfiregpg.org

iD8DBQFH8qtm5YBsbHkuyV0RAkXlAKCH8lL9H8XInLRvlbKnh84XafXyZwCg2Qom
a3TuUMKHH7Yq/zZaA4MI7hk=
=yLQJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-04-01 21:55:45 Re: actualized SQL/PSM patch
Previous Message Murray Cumming 2008-04-01 21:31:23 Re: [HACKERS] Avahi support for Postgresql