Re: [HACKERS] New partitioning - some feedback - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dean Rasheed
Subject Re: [HACKERS] New partitioning - some feedback
Date
Msg-id CAEZATCWcfFtsbKYcVyqUzoOsxkikQjpi_GdjZ_vL6RcX8iLEsg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] New partitioning - some feedback  (Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 12 July 2017 at 23:23, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> wrote:
> I also agree that there probably isn't much need for a list that
> *only* includes partitions, but if someone comes up with a convincing
> use case, then we could add another 2-letter command for that.
>

Actually, I just thought of a round-about sort of use case:

The various 2-letter commands \dE, \dt, etc... are designed to work
together, so you can do things like \dEt or \dtE to list all local and
foreign tables, whilst excluding views, sequences, etc. So, if for the
sake of argument, \dP were made to list partitions, then you'd be able
to do things like \dEPt to list all the various kinds of tables,
including partitions, whilst excluding views, etc.

That seems somewhat more elegant and flexible than \d++ or \d! or whatever.

Of course, you'd have to decide whether a foreign partition came under
\dE, \dP, both or something else. I'm not sure that we should eat
another letter of the alphabet just for that case, because there
aren't many left, and I don't think any will be natural mnemonics like
the others.

Regards,
Dean



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] building libpq.a static library
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions