Hi, Thank you for developing a good feature. I found while testing PostgreSQL 16 Beta 1 that the output of the \? metacommand did not include \dS, \dpS. The attached patch changes the output of the \? meta command to:
Current output psql=# \? \z [PATTERN] same as \dp \dp [PATTERN] list table, view, and sequence access privileges Patched output psql=# \? \dp[S] [PATTERN] list table, view, and sequence access privileges \z[S] [PATTERN] same as \dp Regards, Noriyoshi Shinoda -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2023 2:46 AM To: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rash...@gmail.com> Cc: Maxim Orlov <orlo...@gmail.com>; Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net>; Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz>; Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>; Isaac Morland <isaac.morl...@gmail.com>; Justin Pryzby <pry...@telsasoft.com>; Pavel Luzanov <p.luza...@postgrespro.ru>; pgsql-hack...@postgresql.org Subject: Re: add \dpS to psql On Sat, Jan 07, 2023 at 11:18:59AM +0000, Dean Rasheed wrote: > It might be true that temp tables aren't usually interesting from a > permissions point of view, but it's not hard to imagine situations > where interesting things do happen. It's also probably the case that > most users won't have many temp tables, so I don't think including > them by default will be particularly intrusive. > > Also, from a user perspective, I think it would be something of a POLA > violation for \dp[S] and \dt[S] to include different sets of tables, > though I appreciate that we do that now. There's nothing in the docs > to indicate that that's the case. Agreed. > Anyway, I've pushed the v2 patch as-is. If anyone feels strongly > enough that we should change its behaviour for temp tables, then we > can still discuss that. Thanks! -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
psql_dpS_metacommand_v1.diff
Description: psql_dpS_metacommand_v1.diff
