On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 10:53 PM Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> wrote:
>
> On 2026-Feb-26, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
> > Or both? IOW, display comments if either that psql variable is enabled
> > or "*" is specified in the \d command; otherwise, omit them.
> >
> > With this approach, users who prefer the current behavior (showing comments
> > with the "+" option) can simply enable that psql variable and see comments
> > without adding "*". Conversely, users who prefer not to include comments
> > can disable that variable and use "*" only when they want to display them.
>
> I like this, thanks. I wonder though if the variable ought to be more
> generic.
I'm fine with this direction, but I think it should be handled as a separate
improvement to the \d meta-commands, rather than as part of the current patch
extending \dRp+, \dRs+, and \dX+.
I'm thinking to first commit the v3 patch so that comments on publications,
subscriptions, and extended statistics can be viewed via \d. After that,
we can consider a broader overhaul of the \d commands and how comments are
displayed, as discussed.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
