Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Oh, okay. I would not object to suppressing pg_temp_NNN schemas from
> >> the \dn display. That isn't what this patch does, however.
>
> > OK. I read the TODO and it says only:
> > * Have psql \dn show only visible schemas using current_schemas()
>
> That TODO was your interpretation of the discussion; I'm not sure anyone
> else bought into it.
>
> > so that's what I did, but I think now I have to add a test so only
> > non-visible temp schemas are suppressed,
>
> You are complicating something that could be simple. Why not just
> suppress schemas named 'pg_temp_XXX', period? I don't see any strong
> reason to display them, whether they are your own backend's temp schema
> or not. Arguably, the fact that temp tables are kept in a special
> schema is an implementation detail that most people won't care about.
> And there is no data that \dn can show that is really important for temp
> schemas. The owner column is at best misleading...
OK, unless someone objects, I will head in that direction.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
