Re: psql's \d commands --- end of the line for 1-character identifiers?
От | Christopher Kings-Lynne |
---|---|
Тема | Re: psql's \d commands --- end of the line for 1-character identifiers? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 015301c29fc9$0f076160$6500a8c0@internal обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | psql's \d commands --- end of the line for 1-character identifiers? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: psql's \d commands --- end of the line for 1-character
Re: psql's \d commands --- end of the line for Re: psql's \d commands --- end of the line for 1-character identifiers? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> ... and that was already proposed for "show schemas" (namespaces). > > I'm inclined to think it's time to bite the bullet and go over to > words rather than single characters to identify the \d target > (viz, "\dschema", "\dcast", etc, presumably with unique abbreviations > being allowed, as well as special cases for the historical single > characters). Hmmm...I'm not certain that the \d commands really NEED to have a logical link to the actual thing you're listing. If you just made \dh for schemas, people would look it up and then remember it from then on. It's probably not a huge deal. We could do DESCRIBE commands as well. Also, what happened to the INFORMATION_SCHEMA proposal? Wasn't Peter E doing something with that? What happened to it? > The issue here is what do we do with the existing "\d[istvS]" behavior > (for instance, "\dsit" means "list sequences, indexes, and tables"). > Is that useful enough to try to preserve, or do we just bit-bucket it? > If we do try to preserve it, how should it work? I'd much rather it were preserved, and I'm sure most people would as well. Chris
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: