Re: patch: autocomplete for functions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: patch: autocomplete for functions
Date
Msg-id 1332186150.8435.14.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: patch: autocomplete for functions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: patch: autocomplete for functions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On fre, 2012-03-16 at 13:47 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm a bit concerned about whether that's actually going to be useful.
> A quick check shows that in the regression database, the proposed patch
> produces 3246 possible completions, which suggests that by the time you
> get down to a unique match you're going to have typed most of the name
> anyway.

Well, the regression test database is not really an example of real-life
object naming, I think.  I tried this out on a couple of real databases
and found it quite handy.
> 
> BTW, you should at least exclude dropped columns, I think.
> 
Yes.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Regarding column reordering project for GSoc 2012
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation)