Re: Showing parallel status in \df+ - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: Showing parallel status in \df+
Date
Msg-id 20160708173604.GA729993@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Showing parallel status in \df+  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Showing parallel status in \df+  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> > On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
> >> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
> >> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with
> >> the expanded display mode, and it may not matter adding more
> >> information.
> >> Thoughts about adding this piece of information?
> 
> > Seems like a good idea to me. It's going to be useful in debugging
> 
> If we're going to change \df+ at all, could I lobby for putting the Owner
> column next to Security?  They're logically related, and not related to
> Volatility which somehow got crammed between.  So I'm imagining the column
> order as
> 
> Schema   | Name | Result data type | Argument data types |  Type  | Security | Owner | Volatility | Parallel |
Language| Source code | Description 
 
> 
> Or maybe Owner then Security.

Agreed.

As a separate concern, IMO having the source code in a \df+ column is
almost completely useless.  I propose to split that out to a separate
\df command (say \df% or \df/) that shows *only* the source code.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: minor plpgsql doc patch
Next
From: Fabien COELHO
Date:
Subject: Re: minor plpgsql doc patch