Re: [PATCH v1] Show whether tables are logged in \dt+
От | David Fetter |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH v1] Show whether tables are logged in \dt+ |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20190427041849.GL28936@fetter.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH v1] Show whether tables are logged in \dt+ (Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
nRe: [PATCH v1] Show whether tables are logged in \dt+
(Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>)
Re: [PATCH v1] Show whether tables are logged in \dt+ (Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 04:22:18PM +0200, Rafia Sabih wrote: > On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 at 14:49, Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 at 10:30, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello David, > > > > > > >>> I noticed that there wasn't a bulk way to see table logged-ness in psql, > > > >>> so I made it part of \dt+. > > > >> > > > >> Applies, compiles, works for me. > > > >> > > > >> ISTM That temporary-ness is not shown either. Maybe the persistence column > > > >> should be shown as is? > > > > > > > > Temporariness added, but not raw. > > > > > > Ok, it is better like this way. > > > > > > >> Tests? > > > > > > > > Included, but they're not stable for temp tables. I'm a little stumped > > > > as to how to either stabilize them or test some other way. > > > > > > Hmmm. First there is the username which appears, so there should be a > > > dedicated user for the test. > > > > > > I'm unsure how to work around the temporary schema number, which is > > > undeterministic with parallel execution it. I'm afraid the only viable > > > approach is not to show temporary tables, too bad:-( > > > > > > >> Doc? > > > > > > > > What further documentation does it need? > > > > > > Indeed, there is no precise doc, so nothing to update :-)/:-( > > > > > > > > > Maybe you could consider adding a case for prior 9.1 version, something > > > like: > > > ... case c.relistemp then 'temporary' else 'permanent' end as ... > > > > > > > > I was reviewing this patch and found a bug, > > > > create table t (i int); > > create index idx on t(i); > > \di+ > > psql: print.c:3452: printQuery: Assertion `opt->translate_columns == > > ((void *)0) || opt->n_translate_columns >= cont.ncolumns' failed. > > Looking into this further, apparently the position of > > if (verbose) > { > + /* > + * Show whether the table is permanent, temporary, or unlogged. > + */ > + if (pset.sversion >= 91000) > + appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, > + ",\n case c.relpersistence when 'p' then 'permanent' when 't' > then 'temporary' when 'u' then 'unlogged' else 'unknown' end as > \"%s\"", > + gettext_noop("Persistence")); > > is not right, it is being called for indexes with verbose option also. > There should be an extra check for it being not called for index case. > Something like, > if (verbose) > { > /* > * Show whether the table is permanent, temporary, or unlogged. > */ > if (!showIndexes) > if (pset.sversion >= 91000) > appendPQExpBuffer(&buf, > ",\n case c.relpersistence when 'p' then 'permanent' when 't' then > 'temporary' when 'u' then 'unlogged' else 'unknown' end as \"%s\"", > gettext_noop("Persistence")); > > Not sure, how do modify it in a more neat way. I suspect that as this may get a little messier, but I've made it fairly neat short of a major refactor. Best, David. -- David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: