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

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
Date
Msg-id 200901151645.n0FGj9307709@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > The basic goal of the patch was to make 'S' consistent for all \d
> > backslash commands, and we had a lot of discussion about it, and many
> > people asked for it (I can't find my user functions).
> 
> I think this falls in the category of "be careful what you wish for,
> you might get it".  It is now blindingly obvious that the folks asking
> for that had not actually lived with the behavior for any period of
> time.
> 
> Personally I think we should just revert the patch and go back to the
> behavior we've had for umpteen years.  However, if you cannot bear to
> leave well enough alone, how about *reversing* the sense --- that is,
> default behavior is to show everything and there is an extra character
> to omit system objects?

I got several emails thanking me for applying the patch, so there is
clearly user-demand for 'S'.  I think _we_ as developers look at the
system stuff a lot but in user-land, they would rather not see it by
default.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
Next
From: "Greg Sabino Mullane"
Date:
Subject: Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch