Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 2014-06-22 20:02:57 -0700, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Ian Barwick <ian@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>>> On 23/06/14 00:58, Andres Freund wrote:
>>>> I thought about committing this but couldn't get over this bit. If you
>>>> type "SELECT * FROM pg_cat<tab>" it'll get autocompleted to
>>>> pg_catalog.pg_ and "pg_temp<tab>" will list all the temp schemas
>>>> including the numeric and toast ones. So we have precedent for *not*
>>>> bothering about excluding any schemas. I don't think we should start
>>>> doing so in a piecemal fashion in an individual command's completion.
>>
>>> There is an exception of sorts already for system schemas, in that although
>>> "SELECT * FROM p<tab>" will list the system schemas, it will not list any
>>> tables from them, and won't until "SELECT * FROM pg_<tab>" is entered
>>> (see note in tab-completion.c around line 3722).
>>
>>> Personally I'd be mildly annoyed if every "SET search_path TO p<tab>" resulted
>>> in all the system schemas being displayed when all I want is "public"; how
>>> about having these listed only once "pg_" is entered, i.e.
>>> "SET search_path TO pg_<tab>"?
>>
>> I think there is a pretty strong practical argument for excluding the
>> pg_temp and pg_toast schemas from completion for search_path, namely
>> that when does anyone ever need to include those in their search_path
>> explicitly?
>
> Infrequently, yes. I've only done it when trying to break stuff ;)
>
>> The use-case for including pg_catalog in your path is perhaps a bit
>> greater, but not by much.
>
> I don't know. It feelds like inappropriate nannyism to me. More
> confusing than actually helpful. The schemas are there, so they should
> get autocompleted.
> But anyway, the common opinion seems to be swinging against my position,
> so lets do it that way.
I would be for excluding the pg_toast, pg_toast_temp_n, and
pg_temp_n schemas, and including public and pg_catalog.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
