"Greg Sabino Mullane" <g...@turnstep.com> writes:
>> I think either "\dfU a*" or "\dfU *.a*" is a sufficiently close
>> approximation to that. The behavior you are asking for is essentially
>> "I want to pay attention to the search path, except not actually follow
>> its rules", which is bogus. Either you want to see the functions you
>> can call without schema qualification, or you want to see 'em all ---
>> it does no good whatsoever to lie about the visibility.
> But that's what \dt and \di and \dv have done since forever, and I've
> never heard a single complaint about it.
The reason it's not really an issue for those is that we still maintain
the convention that system catalogs have names beginning with "pg_",
and most people still avoid such names for user tables, and so there is
no conflict that search path order would matter for. With function
names there is no such standard and thus far greater risk of collisions.
It is a serious, serious error to suppose that behavior that is good
enough for tables (and in fact was designed before we had schemas...)
is also good enough for functions.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
