Re: Showing parallel status in \df+
| От | Pavel Stehule |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Showing parallel status in \df+ |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAFj8pRCxuCQd6QH6ZWVH7+QU_t8hN0GUnDhe18afy4qcSN7vBQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Showing parallel status in \df+ (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Showing parallel status in \df+
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
2016-09-28 21:59 GMT+02:00 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>:
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> I am sorry, I disagree. Proposed form is hard readable. Is not possible to
> simply copy/paste.
Why do you care? You can use \sf if you want to copy&paste the
function code.
I know so I can use \sf. But I don't see any sense to have less readable output of any psql command.
> I cannot to imagine any use case for proposed format.
My vote (which was not counted by Stephen) was to remove it from \df+
altogether. I stand by that. People who are used to seeing the output
in \df+ will wonder "where the heck did it go" and eventually figure it
out, at which point it's no longer a problem. We're not breaking
anyone's scripts, that's for sure.
I prefer removing before proposed solution with proposed format.
We are in cycle because prosrc field is used for two independent features - and then it can be hard to find a agreement.
Name of function in dll is some different than PL function body. But it is stored and displayed in one field - and it is impossible do it well.
Regards
Pavel
If we're not removing it, I +0 support the option of moving it to
footers. I'm -1 on doing nothing.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: