On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:13:59AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> My own take on it is that actually I'd prefer one command for all of
> these. If I say "\df sum" it would be good if the output included the
> sum() aggregates; the reason being that I might be wondering if I can
> create a plain function named sum. If I have to check not only \df and
> \da but also \dw for conflicts, that's going to be a real PITA. Also,
> pity the poor newbie who is unclear on the distinctions between these
> different function-looking animals, and is just trying to find some
> documentation on rank().
>
> If we were designing in a green field I think you could make a real
> strong case for a single \df command with an output column "type" having
> the alternatives regular, aggregate, window, and maybe trigger.
What would it do for triggers?
Sounds like a general identifier search; there seem to be two big
namespaces in PG at the moment, that of things that look like function
calls and that of relations (and their types).
CREATE TABLE foo ( i int, t text );
and
CREATE TYPE foo AS ( t text);
both go into the same namespace so would appear to be a similar symptom
as above. I have a feeling this is going a bit further than you're
thinking above.
Not sure about the newbie argument; I'd expect them to be using google
and wouldn't know much about the backslash commands in psql.
-- Sam http://samason.me.uk/