Re: Unexpected behavior from psql
| От | Tim Hart |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Unexpected behavior from psql |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | FEE09F94-B09E-4CEF-A0B2-243C6EC1ADA4@mac.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Unexpected behavior from psql (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-general |
On Jan 11, 2009, at 8:16 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 17:13 -0600, Tim Hart wrote: >> Would it be worthwhile to specify this in the documentation? One of >> the sources of my confusion was the following statement: >> >> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/app-psql.html: >> >> \distvS >> "... to obtain a listing of all the matching objects..." >> >> I fully understand that 'foo' would need to be qualified when used in >> sql, pl/pgsql, etc. >> >> I understood the documentation to read that all tables, views, and >> sequences in the search path would be listed, not just those >> unobscured. >> > > See the paragraph: > > "A pattern that contains a dot (.) is interpreted as a schema name > pattern followed by an object name pattern. For example, \dt > foo*.*bar* > displays all tables whose table name includes bar that are in schemas > whose schema name starts with foo. When no dot appears, then the > pattern > matches only objects that are visible in the current schema search > path. > Again, a dot within double quotes loses its special meaning and is > matched literally." > > And: > > "Whenever the pattern parameter is omitted completely, the \d commands > display all objects that are visible in the current schema search > path — > this is equivalent to using the pattern *. To see all objects in the > database, use the pattern *.*. " > > Perhaps it could be a little clearer in the short descriptions, do you > have a suggestion? > > Regards, > Jeff Davis In hindsight for me, a simple note would have been sufficient. Something along the lines of "Note: Without an explicit pattern, \d lists objects according to current scoping rules. For a full listing, use "*.*" Just a thought. I consider myself better informed. Thanks for the info. Tim
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: