Re: Showing parallel status in \df+

Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> 2016-10-03 21:54 GMT+02:00 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>:
>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 8:47 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> Personally I'm on the edge of washing my hands of the whole thing...

>> The hand-washing strategy has a lot to recommend it; this thread is
>> going nowhere fast.  I don't care enough to put up a big stink about
>> the idea of removing PL source code from \df+ output, but it's not
>> what I'd choose to do; let's call me -0 on that option.

> I can write the patch - I am sure so cleaned \df+ output will be better
> than what we have now.

Writing a patch is not the problem.  Getting consensus on what it should
do is the problem.
        regards, tom lane