Re: psql \d+ and oid display
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: psql \d+ and oid display |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5337459F.1080405@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: psql \d+ and oid display (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/29/2014 06:10 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 05:10:49PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> On 03/29/2014 04:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 09:59:36AM -0700, David Johnston wrote: >>>> As my belief is that 99% of the uses of \d are for human consumption >>>> (because machines should in most cases hit the catalogs directly) then >>>> strictly displaying "Includes OIDs" when appropriate has my +1. >>>> >>>> Uses of \d+ in regression suites will be obvious and quickly fixed and >>>> likely account for another 0.9%. >>>> >>>> psql backslash commands are not machine API contracts and should be adapted >>>> for optimal human consumption; thus neutering the argument for maintaining >>>> backward compatibility. >>> One other issue --- we are adding conditional display of "Replica >>> Identity" to psql \d+ in 9.4, so users processing \d+ output are already >>> going to have to make adjustments for 9.4. That is another reason I am >>> asking about this now. >>> >> >> I think Tom's suggestion probably has the most support, although >> it's not unanimous. > Are you saying most people like "Has OIDs: yes", or the idea of just > displaying _a_ line if there are OIDs? Based on default_with_oids, > perhaps we should display "With OIDs". > > I agree it is no unanimous. I am curious how large the majority has to > be to change a psql display value. > 1. _a_ line. 2. Don't make it dependent on the GUC. If the table has OIDS then say so, if not, say nothing. As to majority size, I have no idea. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: