Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
Date
Msg-id 13829.1232060497@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
>> Well, maybe we do need to go with the \df \dfS \dfU approach.
>> But I'm still convinced that setting things up so that it's impossible
>> to search both classes of functions together is a seriously bad idea.

> Agreed -- there are times I *want* to search the system functions, and 
> for less-trained users they might not know the difference between UDFs 
> and builtin functions, especially if they've loaded a few contrib modules.

Yeah, the contrib-module point is a telling one.

> Personally, I don't care that much about what Hungarian Notation we use, 
> as long as we try to make it consistent with \dt, \dv, \dn etc.  My main 
> objection to requiring \dfU to get only user functions is that it's not 
> what we do with \dt.

Well, if we were going to do anything like that, I'd want to change the
behavior of \dt to match everything else.  I don't see the argument why
\dt's existing behavior is sacrosanct if the others aren't ...
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Brendan Jurd"
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump versus views and opclasses
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump versus views and opclasses