Re: Remove source code display from \df+?
| От | Isaac Morland |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Remove source code display from \df+? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAMsGm5f=Wti7Mg9A0efAaC5Sg-g57s-VDMr7FDiC_-R==-ddWA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Remove source code display from \df+? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 17:20, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com> writes:
> [ 0001-Remove-source-code-display-from-df-v6.patch ]
Pushed after some editorialization on the test case.
Thanks!
One thing I noticed while testing is that if you apply \df+ to an
aggregate function, it will show "Internal name" of "aggregate_dummy".
While that's an accurate description of what's in prosrc, it seems
not especially useful and perhaps indeed confusing to novices.
So I thought about suppressing it. However, that would require
a server-version-dependent test and I wasn't quite convinced it'd
be worth the trouble. Any thoughts on that?
I think it’s OK. Right now \df+ claims that the source code for an aggregate function is “aggregate_dummy”; that’s probably more untrue than saying that its internal name is “aggregate_dummy”. There are several features of aggregate functions that are always defined the same way by the creation process; who’s to say they don’t all have a shared dummy internal name?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: