Re: Strange "missing tables" problem

Denis BUCHER <dbucherml@hsolutions.ch> writes:
> Yes that's correct. Therefore my "problem" is the "normal" behavior of
> \dt. But "normal" means "expected". But I don't find it very
> secure/handy, because you expect to see all your tables. Is there a way
> to change the behavior of \dt so that it lists ALL tables present in
> search path ?

It *is* the expected behavior.  The idea is that "\dt foo" should
describe the same table that "select * from foo" would find.
If you want to see all the possible matches for foo, use "\dt *.foo".

            regards, tom lane