On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 02:54:26PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Euler Taveira (euler@timbira.com.br) wrote:
> > On 27-03-2014 10:15, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > When we made OIDs optional, we added an oid status display to \d+:
> > >
> > > test=> \d+ test
> > > Table "public.test"
> > > Column | Type | Modifiers | Storage | Stats target | Description
> > > --------+---------+-----------+---------+--------------+-------------
> > > x | integer | | plain | |
> > > --> Has OIDs: no
> > >
> > > Do we want to continue displaying that OID line, or make it optional for
> > > cases where the value doesn't match default_with_oids?
> > >
> > That line is still important for those tables that have oids. Once a
> > while I see "with oids" set (mainly by mistake or misinformation).
>
> I believe Bruce was suggesting to show it when it is set to *not* the
> default, which strikes me as perfectly reasonable.
We seem to be split on the idea of having "Has OIDs" display only when
the oid status of the table does not match the default_with_oids
default.
I am attaching a patch which implements this, but given no consensus, I
will not apply it unless we can be more definite.
My motivation was that "Has OIDs" was important when we stopped having
an oid column by default, but at this point many users don't even know
what OIDs are and the line is potentially confusing and mostly useless.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +