| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(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: | 2016-09-26 17:28:47 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZgsrWwWiZENOF0fQ+u4_R6kqYuUqLifw6kKqrso=GFLQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> I agree that "do nothing" isn't a good option. I'm not terribly
> thrilled with just putting the source code at the bottom of the \df+
> output either, though it's at least slightly less ridiculous than trying
> to put the source code into a column in a table.
Several people have spoken against that option, but I think it's
actually pretty clearly an improvement over the status quo. If you
don't want to see all of that output, fine; look at the first
screenful and then quit your pager (which probably means "press q").
If you do want to see all of the output, you'll appreciate not having
it indented by 60 or 80 columns any more. There's really no
circumstanced under which it's worse than what we're doing today.
It's fairly likely that there's no option here that will please
everyone completely, but that's not a reason to reject a patch that is
clearly better than what we've got now.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-09-26 17:31:41 | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2016-09-26 17:16:31 | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |