Re: Bug in pg_describe_object

Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se> writes:
> So would anyone be confused by a description of pg_amproc not including
> the types?

It really shouldn't be useful to include those.  Attend what it says in
the fine manual for CREATE OPERATOR CLASS:
In a FUNCTION clause, the operand data type(s) the function isintended to support, if different from the input data
type(s)ofthe function (for B-tree and hash indexes) or the class's datatype (for GIN and GiST indexes). These defaults
arealwayscorrect, so there is no point in specifying op_type in aFUNCTION clause in CREATE OPERATOR CLASS, but the
optionisprovided for consistency with the comparable syntax in ALTEROPERATOR FAMILY.
 

The reason the ALTER OPERATOR FAMILY DROP syntax has to include operand
types is that it lacks the full name/types of the referenced function.
Since getObjectDescription *does* provide those, it doesn't serve any
real purpose to repeat the information.
        regards, tom lane