Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 10350.1232134994@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch ("Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@turnstep.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@turnstep.com> writes: >> I think either "\dfU a*" or "\dfU *.a*" is a sufficiently close >> approximation to that. The behavior you are asking for is essentially >> "I want to pay attention to the search path, except not actually follow >> its rules", which is bogus. Either you want to see the functions you >> can call without schema qualification, or you want to see 'em all --- >> it does no good whatsoever to lie about the visibility. > But that's what \dt and \di and \dv have done since forever, and I've > never heard a single complaint about it. The reason it's not really an issue for those is that we still maintain the convention that system catalogs have names beginning with "pg_", and most people still avoid such names for user tables, and so there is no conflict that search path order would matter for. With function names there is no such standard and thus far greater risk of collisions. It is a serious, serious error to suppose that behavior that is good enough for tables (and in fact was designed before we had schemas...) is also good enough for functions. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: