Hi, On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 6:34 PM Maiquel Grassi <gra...@hotmail.com.br> wrote:
> >That leads me to also wonder why don't we change \conninfo to have this > >tabular behavior instead of creating a separate command for it. Why do > >we need to keep the existing form of \conninfo? To me it seems strictly > >less useful, as it is harder to read. > > Here, you're suggesting that it would be useful to keep the \conninfo > meta-command, improve it with a "new version," and display the returned > content as a table instead of text. If that's the case, I think it's a > good idea > since it would show the "new settings" that the current version doesn't > display and, yes, it would serve the same purpose as \conninfo+. > Sure, we can proceed with that. I do hope this will be the final one we try :) > Regarding which settings to display, the discussion tends to get very > broad, > and we can never settle on what should be shown definitively. I believe > that, often, less is more, so showing only the essential settings would be > enough. > In that case, we can collectively decide which parameters should be shown in this command. My suggestion: - application_name - encodings (maybe?) - role (new patch) - is_superuser - session_authorization - in_hot_standby Feel free to suggest any additions or removals. Regards, Hunaid Sohail
