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

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
Date
Msg-id 603c8f070901151410w32fb832bideaa66c0fa2bed23@mail.gmail.com
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
List pgsql-hackers
> 2. You want to write "\df something".  Fine, that's not going to show
> any system functions anyway, unless there are system functions that are
> also selected by "something".  If there are, it's not apparent to me why
> it's a bad idea to show them; as I've already argued, I think not
> showing them is a horrid idea, especially if they are an exact match
> that will mask the user-defined function.

You seem to be assuming that conflicts between user-defined functions
and system functions are a common problem against which users need
protection.  I have been using PostgreSQL for almost 10 years and am
not sure that I've EVER had a problem with this.  Maybe once?

On the other hand, I want to look at and search my user-defined
functions FREQUENTLY.  I don't care about the system functions.  If I
type \df a*, it's not because I want to see all 6 versions of the
absolute value function and 61 other functions, it's because I don't
want to think hard enough to remember how I spelled the first word in
one of my functions that I know starts with "a".

I can't imagine why it's reasonable for me to want to see a list of
only my own functions, but it's NOT reasonable for me to want to
SEARCH the list of only my own functions.

...Robert


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Hot standby, slot ids and stuff
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch