On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 9:01 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> Based on a quick skim of the thread - which means I most definitely
> missed things - there's not been discussion of why we actually want to
> add this. Who's the prospective user of this facility? And why wouldn't
> they just query pg_am[proc]? None of this information seems like it's
> going to be even remotely targeted towards even advanced users. For
> developers it's not clear what these add?
I see your point regarding pg_am details. Probably nobody expect
developers need this. And probably even developers don't need this,
because it's easier to see IndexAmRoutine directly with more details.
So, +1 for removing this.
pg_amproc for gin/gist/sp-gist/brin is probably for developers. But I
think pg_amproc for btree/hash could be useful for advanced users.
btree/hash opclasses could be written by advanced users using
pl/something, I've faced that several times.
> Adding stuff to psql isn't free. It adds clutter to psql's help output,
> the commands need to be maintained (including cross-version code).
Sure.
------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
