Re: Schema 'public'

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Schema 'public'
Дата
Msg-id 22398.1145425342@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Schema 'public'  (Michael Talbot-Wilson <mtw@view.net.au>)
Список pgsql-novice
Michael Talbot-Wilson <mtw@view.net.au> writes:
> protoaddress=> \d
>                  List of relations
>   Schema |         Name         |   Type   | Owner
> --------+----------------------+----------+-------
>   public | address              | table    | qdu
>   public | address_key_seq      | sequence | qdu
>   public | country              | table    | qdu
>   public | country_k_seq        | sequence | qdu
>   ...

> etc. etc.

> I don't want to know.

That seems to me about as valid as complaining that you shouldn't have
to look at the owner column because you have only one user in your
database.  Or that the type column is useless because you don't have
anything but plain tables in your database.  The \d output is designed
to be useful in typical cases, not custom-tailored for particular
restricted cases.  As Richard suggested, you could make your own view
that shows just what you want ... or hack up psql's describe.c if you're
really determined ...

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Schema 'public'
Следующее
От: "Shoaib Mir"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Defining the same relation in another database