Greetings, * Amos Bird (amosb...@gmail.com) wrote: > psql currently supports \di+ to view indexes, > > List of relations > Schema | Name | Type | Owner | Table | Size | Description > --------+--------------------+-------+-------+---------+--------+------------- > public | ii | index | amos | i | 131 MB | > public | jj | index | amos | i | 12 MB | > public | kk | index | amos | i | 456 kB | > public | numbers_mod2 | index | amos | numbers | 10 MB | > public | numbers_mod2_btree | index | amos | numbers | 214 MB | > (5 rows) > > The co > lumn "Type" is kinda useless (all equals to index). Representing > the actual index type will be more interesting,
Agreed. > Schema | Name | Type | Owner | Table | Size | > Description > --------+--------------------+--------------+-------+---------+--------+------------- > public | ii | index: gist | amos | i | 131 MB | > public | jj | index: gin | amos | i | 12 MB | > public | kk | index: btree | amos | i | 456 kB | > public | numbers_mod2 | index: gin | amos | numbers | 10 MB | > public | numbers_mod2_btree | index: btree | amos | numbers | 214 MB | > (5 rows) > > I'm not sure where to add documentations about this patch or if needed one. > Please help > me if you think this patch is useful. I'm not sure why it's useful to keep the 'index:'? I would suggest we just drop that and keep only the actual index type (gist, gin, etc). Thanks! Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
