"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 09:14 -0800, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>> On Jan 16, 2009, at 8:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> One issue here is that plain \d gets less useful because it'll now
>>> include system catalogs. We could add the additional rule that
>>> the above statements apply only when a pattern is specified, and
>>> without a pattern you get just user stuff (so omitting a pattern
>>> corresponds to pattern "*" with the U modifier, not just "*").
>>> This would probably make it a bit easier to have exactly the same
>>> rules across the board.
>>>
>>> Again, "\dfS" would be a bit useless, unless we say that the implicit
>>> U modifier for no pattern doesn't override an explicit S modifier.
>>>
>>> Comments? Does this cover all the cases?
>>
>> So would "\df" then be equivalent to "\dU"? Or am I misunderstanding
>> something?
> \df would act as it does now. Showing you *everything*.
Which part of the quoted paragraph didn't you read?
regards, tom lane