Re: patch: autocomplete for functions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: patch: autocomplete for functions
Date
Msg-id 9966.1331920074@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: patch: autocomplete for functions  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: patch: autocomplete for functions  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> On tor, 2012-03-15 at 16:36 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of jue mar 15 16:25:53 -0300 2012:
>>> Isn't that just a subset of what I had proposed?
>>> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/1328820579.11241.4.camel@vanquo.pezone.net

>> So do you intend to commit your patch?

> Well, there was quite a bit of discussion about it, but it appears that
> most concerns were addressed at the end.  So yes, I guess, unless
> someone wants further discussion.

I'm a bit concerned about whether that's actually going to be useful.
A quick check shows that in the regression database, the proposed patch
produces 3246 possible completions, which suggests that by the time you
get down to a unique match you're going to have typed most of the name
anyway.

BTW, you should at least exclude dropped columns, I think.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: renaming domain constraint
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #6532: pg_upgrade fails on Python stored procedures