Re: psql \d* and system objects
От | Dimitri Fontaine |
---|---|
Тема | Re: psql \d* and system objects |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6389263A-4878-4B85-9818-C01C525DDC55@hi-media.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: psql \d* and system objects (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: psql \d* and system objects
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, Le 30 mars 09 à 16:52, Bruce Momjian a écrit : > I think the big question is whether the inconsistency (pattern implies > 'S') is worth accepting for greater usability. My answer is yes, please, definitely, go for it. We don't need idiot-proof easy to remember semantics, we need useful ones... The former category is already taken care of by some other open source database software, have I been told... What about a mail with some content? Look, a user-level proposal draft! :) \dt lists user tables only \dtS lists system tables only \dt pattern lists matching user andsystem tables \dfS pattern lists matching system tables only \df lists user functions only \dfS lists system functions only \df pattern lists matching functions asper backend resolution (search_path) \dfS pattern lists matching system functions only, bypass search_path? I think it's kind of easy to decline the concept, and I don't think this will make unanimity. But what about dropping the consistency idea (Tom is saying that it proved to be a damn bad one already) and from there defining a usable tool? Regards, -- dim
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: