Re: [PATCH] psql visibility clarification patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [PATCH] psql visibility clarification patch
Date
Msg-id 10531.1043386380@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to [PATCH] psql visibility clarification patch  ("D. Hageman" <dhageman@dracken.com>)
Responses poor performance of subquery in psql  ("John Liu" <johnl@emrx.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"D. Hageman" <dhageman@dracken.com> writes:
> The goal of this patch is a solution to the issue that I found concerning 
> table visibility.  The problem with the way psql currently lists tables in 
> a database is that it limits it to only the tables currently in the search 
> path.

That's the intended behavior.  I don't think that "\dt foo" should show
any tables other than the same "foo" you'd get from an unqualified
reference to "foo".  If you want to know about foos that are not in
your search path, you can do "\dt *.foo".

Your proposed patch essentially eliminates the distinction between
\dt foo and \dt *.foo.  This doesn't seem like a step forward to me.
Perhaps what's really needed is a documentation patch explaining when
to use each?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Cast and Schemas don't work as expected
Next
From: Justin Clift
Date:
Subject: Re: Release Scheduales: 7.2.4 & 7.3.2