| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(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: Remove "Source Code" column from \df+ ? |
| Date: | 2016-10-12 17:48:41 |
| Message-ID: | 41a333df-992f-8af0-da33-d26c28a0c877@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/12/16 11:16 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm not sure that Peter was voting for retaining "internal name", but
> personally I prefer that to deleting prosrc entirely, so +1.
I'm not sure what the point of showing the internal name would be if we
have already declared that the source code of non-C functions is not
that interesting. But I don't have a strong feeling about it.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2016-10-12 17:53:22 | Re: Remove "Source Code" column from \df+ ? |
| Previous Message | Vitaly Burovoy | 2016-10-12 17:33:18 | Re: macaddr 64 bit (EUI-64) datatype support |