On Mar 28, 2014, at 2:41 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 02:54:26PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
>>> 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.
>
> FWIW, I think that having the display depend on what that GUC is set to
> is a seriously *bad* idea. It will mean that you don't actually know,
> when looking at the output of \d, whether the table has OIDs or not.
Agreed.
> I could get behind a proposal to suppress the line when there are not
> OIDs, full stop; that is, we print either "Has OIDs: yes" or nothing.
> But I think this patch just makes things even more surprising when
> default_with_oids is turned on.
I see little reason to tinker with the status quo.
...Robert