Dear Matt,
Thanks a lot for the nice suggestion. Please find attached the version 7 of
the patch, which incorporates your suggestion: It now disregards the N in
\dN[ti] if pset.sversion < 10.
Best Regards,
Sadeq
PS: Received an error from the mailer, with the following error message, so
remo
Re: Sadeq Dousti
> > I think this is the wrong way round.
> > It should be \dtN instead of \dNt.
>
> Hi Christoph,
> The order does not matter, the user can use \dNt or \dtN, as they do
> exactly the same thing. Letters coming after \d can be freely permuted. If
> you mean a change to the document
The S flag is "universal" enough and can be combined with a wide variety of
commands to show system views. Examples include \d, \dn, \dp, \dL, and so
on. In contrast, the N I'm introducing can only be combined with \d, so I
wouldn't treat it the same as S.
All things that combine with \d (t, i, m,
Sorry Greg,
Just understood what you mean. Please find attached the v6 of the patch.
Best regards,
Sadeq
v6-0001-psql-acommand-for-non-partitioned-tables-indexes.patch
Description: Binary data
> I think this is the wrong way round.
> It should be \dtN instead of \dNt.
Hi Christoph,
The order does not matter, the user can use \dNt or \dtN, as they do
exactly the same thing. Letters coming after \d can be freely permuted. If
you mean a change to the documentation or tests, I can apply wha
> I think it's fine the way it is, with regards to v10 check. Can you post a
> rebased patch?
>
Hi Greg,
I just checked here: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/5594/
Seems the patch is OK with the latest master, and no rebase is needed.
Do you mean that instead of a diff, I post a patch?
B
Re: Sadeq Dousti
> Thanks Greg and others for the feedback!
>
> Please find attached the patch for implementing \dN (including \dNt, \dNi,
> \dNit).
I don't care particularly about the choice of letter, but I think this
is the wrong way round. It should be \dtN instead of \dNt.
Is the form \dN a
I think it's fine the way it is, with regards to v10 check. Can you post a
rebased patch?
Cheers,
Greg
--
Crunchy Data - https://www.crunchydata.com
Enterprise Postgres Software Products & Tech Support
Thanks Vignesh for the review!
> Currently we are supporting only PG13 and higher versions.
I understand that servers older than PG13 are no longer supported. But on
the client side, we still have this notice at the top of describe.c file,
which indicates that the client should support 9.2+.
*
On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 at 23:21, Sadeq Dousti wrote:
>
> Thanks a lot Greg!
>
> > Changes look good to me, thanks. Can you make a new patch that applies a
> > single set of changes to HEAD?
>
> Please find attached the diff to Head in a single file.
Currently we are supporting only PG13 and higher
Thanks a lot Greg!
> Changes look good to me, thanks. Can you make a new patch that applies a
single set of changes to HEAD?
Please find attached the diff to Head in a single file.
Best Regards,
Sadeq Dousti
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/psql-ref.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/psql-ref.sgml
index cedcc
Changes look good to me, thanks. Can you make a new patch that applies a
single set of changes to HEAD?
Cheers,
Greg
--
Crunchy Data - https://www.crunchydata.com
Enterprise Postgres Software Products & Tech Support
Dear Greg,
Thank you so much for the kind and prompt review!
Please find the patches attached. The second patch (0002) is where I
applied the requested changes.
Best regards,
Sadeq Dousti
On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 1:01 AM Greg Sabino Mullane
wrote:
> The patch applies cleanly, and works as adv
The patch applies cleanly, and works as advertised. Nice work!
Quick notes:
* doc/src/sgml/ref/psql-ref.sgml
In the varlistentry section, the order should be the same as the other
places (N after m)
Line 1644 has an extra comma
Line 1651, maybe the example is simpler as \dNt to keep the wordin
Thanks Greg and others for the feedback!
Please find attached the patch for implementing \dN (including \dNt, \dNi,
\dNit).
Best Regards,
Sadeq Dousti
From d8fde4b05eee95089548384c07b59304f2fecc1c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sadeq Dousti <3616518+msdou...@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Tue, 2
On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 3:07 AM Sadeq Dousti wrote:
> * While capitalization of N might seem arbitrary, it can be acceptable as
> it's "negating" some concept
> ...
>
> If there are no hard objections, I'll proceed with adding the N letter to
> \d commands.
>
Not strongly opposed, but "N" is a
Dear all,
I'm grateful for taking your time and providing various solutions!
Personally, I like Tom's idea of using N better:
* It can stand for "not a partition member" or "no partitions", and does
not provide any new terminology.
* It can be combined with various commands \dN, \dtN (or \dNt),
po 24. 2. 2025 v 6:16 odesílatel Tom Lane napsal:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > How about:
> > \pset partition_roots_only 'true'
>
> FWIW, I don't especially love this idea. None of our existing
> \d-type commands use pset parameters for filtering, and I don't
> see a reason to believe that
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> How about:
> \pset partition_roots_only 'true'
FWIW, I don't especially love this idea. None of our existing
\d-type commands use pset parameters for filtering, and I don't
see a reason to believe that people would typically want this
to be a persistent setting. I'
On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 4:31 PM Greg Sabino Mullane
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 4:34 PM Sadeq Dousti wrote:
>
>> Totally agree about the naming. There's no other terminology known to me,
>> but I'll definitely think about it. Of course, I'm very open to
>> suggestions from you or anyone els
On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 4:34 PM Sadeq Dousti wrote:
> Totally agree about the naming. There's no other terminology known to me,
> but I'll definitely think about it. Of course, I'm very open to
> suggestions from you or anyone else in the community.
>
The problem is that we are really tight on a
Sadeq Dousti writes:
>> "High-level" is not terminology we use anywhere else
>> We do use the terms "root partition" or "partition root".
> I agree "high-level" is not standard, but "root partition" also entails
> the table is actually partitioned. This is not necessarily the case.
> The suggeste
> That definition seems bizarre, and even less derivable
> from the term "high-level" than what I thought you meant.
> You really need some other terminology, I think.
Totally agree about the naming. There's no other terminology known to
me, but I'll definitely think about it. Of course, I'm very
Hi Tom,
Thanks a lot for looking into this!
> "High-level" is not terminology we use anywhere else
> We do use the terms "root partition" or "partition root".
I agree "high-level" is not standard, but "root partition" also entails
the table is actually partitioned. This is not necessarily the ca
> Sorry an id was missing in psql documentation, thus CI was failing.
Combining patches into one, as otherwise CI does not combine them.
Best Regards
Sadeq Dousti
From ad81b71fe67174aebd7f6c02a82aa0ab88ff Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sadeq Dousti <3616518+msdousti@users.noreply.github.com>
Sadeq Dousti writes:
> Please find attached the patch to add a new metacommand (\dh) to psql.
I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other about whether this
is useful functionality or not. But if we do want it, I'd like to
bikeshed on the name a bit. "High-level" is not terminology we us
Sorry an id was missing in psql documentation, thus CI was failing.
Please find attached a patch that fixes this issue.
Best Regards,
Sadeq Dousti
Tech Lead and Staff Software Engineer at Trade Republic Bank GmbH
From c7b7f39c171648f3193cb9d61a4815ac32b779e3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sadeq <3
27 matches
Mail list logo
