<p dir="ltr"><br /> Dne 12.1.2015 22:26 "Tom Lane" <<a href="mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us">tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us</a>>
napsal(a):<br/> ><br /> > Alvaro Herrera <<a
href="mailto:alvherre@2ndquadrant.com">alvherre@2ndquadrant.com</a>>writes:<br /> > > Jeff Janes wrote:<br />
>>> I thought of \dx+, but the + is already used to show the objects<br /> > >> associated with the
extensions. (Althought it seems like it would<br /> > >> more in keeping with other usage if \dx+ only listed
theobjects if it<br /> > >> was given a pattern, and did what I propose if given no pattern)<br /> ><br />
>> I hate the pattern/no pattern discrepancy -- I vote not to propagate it<br /> > > any further.<br />
><br/> > The set of things that is known about an installed extension is quite<br /> > a bit different from
whatis known about an uninstalled-but-available<br /> > one. To make \dx print both categories would require
dumbingit down<br /> > to print only the intersection of those things, or else some fancy<br /> > footwork and a
lotof NULL column values. -1 for that. (This is exactly<br /> > why pg_available_extensions is separate from
pg_extensionin the first<br /> > place.)<br /> ><br /> > I'm okay with inventing some new command like "\dxu"
or"\dxa" (mnemonic<br /> > "uninstalled" or "available" respectively).<p dir="ltr">I like \dxa<p dir="ltr">Regards<p
dir="ltr">Pavel<br/> ><br /> > regards, tom lane<br /> ><br /> ><br /> > --<br
/>> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (<a
href="mailto:pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org">pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org</a>)<br/> > To make changes to your
subscription:<br/> > <a
href="http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers">http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers</a><br/>