I wrote:
> Hmm, I wonder how useful that's really going to be, considering
> that trigger names aren't unique across tables. Wouldn't it
> need to be more like "\et table-name trigger-name"?
Different line of thought: \et seems awfully single-purpose.
Perhaps we should think more of "\st table-name trigger-name"
(show trigger), which perhaps could print something along the
lines of
CREATE TRIGGER after_ins_stmt_trig AFTER INSERT ON main_table
FOR EACH STATEMENT EXECUTE FUNCTION trigger_func('after_ins_stmt');
CREATE FUNCTION public.trigger_func()
RETURNS trigger
... the rest like \sf for the trigger function
If you indeed want to edit the function, it's a quick copy-and-paste
from here. But if you just want to see the trigger definition,
this is more wieldy than looking at the whole "\d table-name"
output. Also we have less of an overloading problem with the
command name.
regards, tom lane