Re: psql's \d versus included-index-column feature - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: psql's \d versus included-index-column feature
Date
Msg-id 24241.1531946776@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: psql's \d versus included-index-column feature  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: psql's \d versus included-index-column feature  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2018-Jul-18, David G. Johnston wrote:
>> -1 for printing a boolean t/f; would rather spell it out:
>> 
>> CASE WHEN "Key" THEN 'Key' ELSE 'Included' END AS "Data"

> +1

I can sympathize with the eyestrain argument against t/f, but the
above doesn't seem like an improvement --- in particular, "Data"
as the column header seems quite content-free.  My counterproposal
is to keep "Key" as the header and use "Yes"/"No" as the values.

I'd be OK with "Key"/"Included" as the values if someone can
propose an on-point column header to go with those.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeremy Finzel
Date:
Subject: Re: Background worker/idle sessions and caching
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pgbench "progress" testpending solution of its timing is (fwd)