Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
| От | David G. Johnston |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKFQuwYZLn3+-aBi3HBKywMmjtyiSUZqnwzkJ-aYsZ0ORyS8gA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:27 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com> writes:
> - I think there should be much more distinctive lines between the different
> functions. As it is the fact that the table is groups of 3 lines doesn’t
> jump out at the eye.
I don't know any easy way to do that. We do already have the grouping
visible in the first column...
Can we lightly background color every other rowgroup (i.e., "greenbar")?
I don't think having a separate Result column helps. The additional horizontal whitespace distances all relevant context information (at least on a wide monitor). Having the example rows mirror the Signature row seems like an easier to consume choice.
e.g.,
enum_first(null::rainbow) → red
date '2001-09-28' + 7 → 2001-10-05
Its also removes the left alignment in a fixed width column which draws unwanted visual attention.
David J.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: