Re: Include access method in listTables output

From: Georgios <gkokolatos(at)protonmail(dot)com>
To: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Include access method in listTables output
Date: 2020-06-30 09:23:26
Message-ID: EqMRJvjKaydzl4S4TLkR_4R1JbBmxB6aPHHxKVERhmDGMb66uzB9Iq1BYk7Go_RWdbeDBZxQ5ZFLvVUQoJX5KBfgcjUVgCduiTUZd0SypCE=@protonmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, June 20, 2020 3:15 PM, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 6:13 PM Georgios gkokolatos(at)protonmail(dot)com wrote:
>
> > > Few comments:
> > >
> > > - if (pset.sversion >= 120000)
> > >
> > > - appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf,
> > >
> > > - "\n LEFT JOIN pg_catalog.pg_am am ON am.oid = c.relam");
> > > Should we include pset.hide_tableam check along with the version check?
> > >
> >
> > I opted against it, since it seems more intuitive to have a single
> > switch and placed on the display part. A similar pattern can be found
> > in describeOneTableDetails(). I do not hold a strong opinion and will
> > gladly ament if insisted upon.
>
> I felt we could add that check as we might be including
> pg_catalog.pg_am in cases even though we really don't need it.

As promised, I gladly ament upon your request. Also included a fix for
a minor oversight in tests, they should now be stable. Finally in this
version, I extended a bit the logic to only include the access method column
if the relations displayed can have one, for example sequences.

>
> Regards,
> Vignesh
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Include-AM-in-listTables-output-v3.patch application/octet-stream 7.9 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Etsuro Fujita 2020-06-30 09:30:49 Re: estimation problems for DISTINCT ON with FDW
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2020-06-30 09:10:56 Re: [PATCH] Remove Extra palloc Of raw_buf For Binary Format In COPY FROM