Re: psql \d commands and information_schema
От | Martin Pihlak |
---|---|
Тема | Re: psql \d commands and information_schema |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 49D87979.4000204@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: psql \d commands and information_schema (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: psql \d commands and information_schema
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > I don't find this to be a pressing problem. If the user has lots of > schemas, they probably have lots of objects too, and are unlikely to > need such a thing. Current behaviour makes it impossible to get a quick overview of all the user defined objects. And it doesn't really matter what the number of schemas is -- it gets messy for even small number of schemas and objects. Lets assume 2 user tables in schemas "public" and "foo". \dt *.* will give: List of relations Schema | Name | Type | Owner --------------------+-------------------------+-------+---------foo | t2 | table | martinpinformation_schema| sql_features | table | martinp ...pg_catalog | pg_aggregate | table | martinp ...public | t1 | table | martinp (51 rows) This is a lot of irrelevant stuff the user has to filter out. It is much worse with functions -- \df *.* results in 1900+ functions that I usually don't want to see. The alternative is to perform a \dn first and then loop through that (this is the annoyance the U switch would remove). > search_path enters into it too; a simple U switch isn't going to provide > a full answer. > For our needs I wouldn't really consider using search_path for anything but temporary hacks. However, a psql variable that specifies a list of name patterns to be excluded from describe, could be useful. Something along the lines of: \set DESCRIBE_EXCLUDE_PATTERNS 'pg_catalog.*, information_schema.*, ...' This could be then customized to each site's needs -- add pgq, slony, etc. and put to .psqlrc. It is questionable whether the filter should be applied to default \dX (override with S to describe all). Maybe it'd be better to introduce an extra switch that applies the filters. I just noticed that something similar was already suggested by Euler in http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/49CDB4E0.8030603@timbira.com regards, Martin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: