Re: psql questions: SQL, progname, copyright dates - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Subject | Re: psql questions: SQL, progname, copyright dates |
Date | |
Msg-id | 200408290339.i7T3dxs18400@candle.pha.pa.us Whole thread Raw |
In response to | psql questions: SQL, progname, copyright dates ("Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@turnstep.com>) |
Responses |
Re: psql questions: SQL, progname, copyright dates
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: [ There is text before PGP section. ] > [ PGP not available, raw data follows ] > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > I was looking through the code of psql and had a few questions: > > 1. Do we want to use quote_ident on object names? Ideally, column > names with a space in them, for example, should be surrounded by > double quotes. Example of it failing? You mean like \d tablename? > > 2. There is a disconnect between what \? says: > > \d [NAME] describe table, index, sequence, or view > \d{t|i|s|v|S} [PATTERN] (add "+" for more detail) > list tables/indexes/sequences/views/system tables > > and the actual default case: > > WHERE c.relkind IN ('r','v','S','') > > Should we include indexes by default? If not, the help file should > be clearer about what happens when no arg is given to \d. The issue is that while \d doesn't list indexes, \d indexname works. Any idea how to clarify that? > 3. I'd like to rearrange the ORDER BY on some objects to show > user-created objects before system ones. Currently, if I create > a new function and do a \df, I have to wade through all the > system functions in the pg_catalog schema before seeing mine. > This seems to be solely because "public" comes after "pg_catalog" > alphabetically. Well, at least they are together at the bottom. > 4. Some of the ORDER BY clauses are incomplete, and not all are > consistent with each other. Most seem to be ordering by schema name, > then object name. If this the direction we want all of them to > go? (e.g. \df) I would think so, yea. > 5. psql from cvs was coredumping on me earlier today when psql_error > was called. I tracked it down to the invoking of the pset.progname > variable in fprintf, but the problem fixed itself on the next make, > so I don't have more detail than that. I'd appreciate if someone could > check out the 'progname' var and see if I overlooked something. Not sure. > 6. Can someone run that magic year-changing update script mentioned > earlier? The dates should be 2004, not 2003. Running now. Thanks. -- 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
pgsql-hackers by date: