Dickson dos Santos Guedes wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Brendan Jurd <direvus@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I was going to try this patch out, but it would not apply. Seems that
>> where the patch should have &, it has & instead. Has this somehow
>> been HTML entity-ified?
>
> Hi Brendan,
>
> You are right, I don't now why this occurs. I'm sending it now
> gziped, You may test it again.
Although it would often be nice to see tables sorted by size, I don't
like having a different ordering in verbose mode, that's just confusing.
Patch committed, sans the ordering change. I also moved the Size column
before Description, I think it looks better to have the potentially long
Description column at the end. It's also consistent with the \l+ output
that way.
Thanks for the patch!
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
